This website is devoted to the extraordinary mystics and visionaries of the Church, especially those who are lesser known such as St Gemma Galgani, Blessed Alexandrina da Costa, Sr Josefa Menendez, Marie Rose Ferron, Rev. Pere Lamy, Gabrielle Bossis and others. The author endeavors always to be in communion with the Catholic Church and its teachings. May God bless all who visit here. +

Update Jan 1, 2018:Concerning Mr. Johnston's alleged prophecies and private revelations, from early on this writer often commented that time and events (or lack of events) will clearly reveal whether Charlie's prophecies are authentic, or not. In other words, time will tell. Well, as of today (January 1, 2018) time has clearly revealed that Mr. Johnston's numerous prophecies have ALL been shown to be completely false, most notably his predictions concerning the Presidential election, the great worldwide "Storm" which he foretold would bring global economic collapse and civil strife, toppling governments throughout the globe, war with political Islam resulting with the mass conversion of most Muslims, then a war with China, and generalized global chaos resulting in 26 million dead, all culminating with the miraculous "Rescue" apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to all of humanity, all of which was prophesied by Charlie to occur by the end of 2017. In conclusion, since Charlie's prophecies have now all been shown to be completely false, he joins the list of recent failed visionaries whose stories have been highlighted on this site, such as "Locutions to the World" and "Maria Divine Mercy", and together they provide a strong cautionary warning for all of us in regards to purported visionaries and mystics of past and present, urging us to be very cautious and prudent in our discernment concerning such persons, reaffirming the statement and warning of St Paul of the Cross, the founder of the Passionists and great mystic himself, who once stated that 9 out of 10 purported visionaries are false. Perhaps this estimation from St Paul of the Cross is a bit high, but then again perhaps not. -Glenn Dallaire-------------------------------UPDATE, January 20, 2017:

With the successful
inauguration of President Donald Trump comes the unfulfilled conclusion to both parts
of the alleged angelic “Presidential prophecy” of Charlie Johnston, namely that Obama
will not finish his term and the next leader will not come from the political
system (ie.-not elected), as detailed in the article below. It was a
bold two-part prophecy that has now ended in a double fail.

When one claims to be a
prophet of God, one’s life and most especially one’s prophecies are
automatically held for scrutiny before the court of public opinion. In this
court of public opinion, the preponderance of the evidence is what often
initially sways one’s opinion, yet there eventually comes to pass certain very
important matters for discernment, such as key prophecies, which depending on
their eventual turnout, will considerably authenticate, or invalidate, the
purported mission and message of such persons. And when one compares the alleged
angelic ‘Presidential prophecy’ against today’s successful inauguration, the
conclusions to be drawn are self-evident.

With the above being
said, one would strongly suspect that today’s inauguration, which by all
appearances completely invalidates the first formal public prophecy of Charlie
Johnston, will likely be one of these aforementioned key matters for
discernment that will have a decisive impact in judging his purported prophetic
mission and message for a good many people. For if a prophet is judged by
his prophecies as the saying goes, then today’s failure of the purported
angelic ‘Presidential prophecy’, as detailed in the article below,
will for many persons surely bring with it an unfavorable judgment in
what concerns the prophetic mission of Charlie Johnston.

For in his blog post "The Election...and Other Potential Triggers" Charlie writes:"...If, next January,
Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or
Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not
happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify
you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most
frightening year for the globe in history."

And again, concerning
today’s inauguration, for his part Charlie has also declared in his post
entitled “Election day” on November 7th that:

“…If, on January 20, Obama peacefully transfers
power to either Trump or Clinton, I will declare myself unreliable and retire
into silence.”

With this pledge, one
finds that today’s inauguration will bring with it not only the end of Obama’s
term, but also the end of Charlie Johnston’s public blogging, speaking
engagements, and future predictions, at least for a time, though the loss of
credibility from today’s events will likely be permanent.

And I say "for a
time" simply because of Charlie's recent comments on his blog concerning
the possibility of today's failure of his "Presidential prophecy",
wherein he recently speaks about the possibility of being "recalled" by
God into a silent, private period for some sort of remedial prophetic discernment
re-training "for a time".

Nevertheless, for those
who in good faith spread amongst their family, friends and coworkers Charlie's
prediction concerning "Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming
from the political process", and who are now left feeling much like
"the boy who cried wolf", one can only presume that any possible
future prophetic predictions from Charlie will be given little or no credence,
if not outright opposition by many who have followed his work and message, as is perhaps justifiably merited by today's
developments. In the end, it is up to Archbishop Aquila of Denver to make any formal judgments concerning Charlie Johnston's private revelations.As for this writer, I can say that while I have always been reluctant to highlight purported LIVING mystics and visionaries, I am even more so now after these recent events.May God bless the United States of America, and all of humanity.

-Glenn Dallaire, January 20, 2017

Charlie Johnston during a recent FOCUS TV interview

The final days for the possible fulfillment of a purported Angelic prophecy

By: Glenn Dallaire

Jan. 7, 2017 -Vigil of the Epiphany
Many readers of this website are familiar with the original article that I wrote back in January 2015 entitled "Charlie Johnston -An alleged prophet with a critically important message for humanity". In it I discussed at length Charlie's purported prophetic mission and message, along with a short biography of his life. And for the past two years it has been one of the most popular articles on this website.

The Presidential prophecy
In the past week, the comments beneath that original article have exploded (there are now currently a total of 770 comments), as has my email inbox, with most everyone commenting specifically on the angelic prophecy allegedly given to Charlie, which I have named "The Presidential prophecy":"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."The obvious reason for all of the recent attention to this specific alleged angelic prophecy is the upcoming scheduled Presidential Inauguration scheduled for this January 20th--just 2 weeks away from this writing. For his part, just yesterday Charlie published an article entitled "A Decisive Conundrum" which addresses this matter, in part.This particular prophecy is the first of a series of alleged angelic prophesies concerning the world that are to occur mostly this year (2017). And since we are delving into this subject of alleged "Angelic" messages given to Charlie, it should be pointed out that the Angel whom has purportedly visited Charlie from childhood is the Archangel Gabriel, as was specifically revealed to Charlie during one of the "visitations". The other predictions that Charlie insists upon are highlighted in his article entitled"Go Forth". In it Charlie reveals eight worldwide events that are said to occur::

"I only have eight public prophecies that I insist on. Only the visible, miraculous Rescue by Our Lady, the Immaculate Conception in late 2017, is time sensitive. Five things must happen between now and the Rescue, but can happen at any time during that period. They are:

– The continued toppling of governments throughout the world, including that of the U.S. The toppling of a government does not mean the nation shall fall.

– The confrontation with and fall of political Islam.

– The mass conversion of most Muslims

– The confrontation between the Judeo-Christian world and the current government of China.

– The alliance between Russia and the U.S. to lead the Judeo-Christian world to endure the confrontation with China.

-Then, after the 5 things above comes the miraculous "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary sometime in late 2017.

Then there are two prophecies that happen shortly after the Rescue. They are the unification of the faithful into one flock under one shepherd and the building and location of the Shrine of thanksgiving for the Rescue on Mount Meeker in Colorado.

Together these predicted events constitute for humanity what Charlie calls "The Storm"--a series of events which he states is already well underway. As of today (January 7, 2017), the most obvious observation concerning the prophesies above is that time is really running out for them to all happen before the miraculous Rescue in late 2017. Thus, from an intellectually reasoned perspective, it is probably readily apparent to many that such predictions are already a failure, given the time-frames involved for such things to occur in "real" time. But then, who really knows just yet? For God is not limited by our human constraints and He is always full of surprises.

It should be noted that the "Presidential prophecy" is NOT part of the eight public prophesies that Charlie insists upon. I don't know what bearing that may have, if any, in the upcoming days and weeks.

"God has appointed that this be a sign to you"
In his article "The Election...and Other Potential Triggers" Charlie writes:"If, next January, Barack Obama peacefully hands over the reins of power to Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, I will declare myself unreliable and go away. But it will not happen that way, for God has appointed that this be a sign to you to fortify you to trust Him and choose the ordinary way to follow Him through the most frightening year for the globe in history."

Of course for now the big question at this point is whether or not the purported angelic prophecy concerning Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming from the election process will come to pass as foretold in the remaining two weeks before the scheduled Presidential inauguration on January 20th. And the obvious implication in the opinion of many people is that this prophecy is key in determining whether Charlie is truly an authentic prophet, or not. For as the saying goes "A prophet is judged by his prophecies", or as Scripture tells us:

"And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not fear him." (Deuteronomy 18:21-22).

For his part, Charlie has stated numerous times that if this particular prophecy concerning Obama not finishing his term were to fail, with the presidency successfully transitioned to Donald Trump, that he will post one last post on his blog, then go away:

"Certainly, if we have a normal inauguration a month from now, I will retire from the field, for that prophecy will have been objectively wrong. I take full responsibility for that. But it won’t change what you are called to do.

Noting that I do and will take responsibility, your standard would require you to dismiss St. Joan of Arc as a false prophet for the times she erred on saying how the battle would go – and many of the Old Testament prophets who were often off on their timing, sometimes by years. I do not say this to try to justify any error on my part. I strongly urge you to examine yourself and consider what God calls you to. But yep, a month from now if we have a normal inauguration, you can give me a big old thumbs down."

January 8, 2017 at 9:21 pm"If the inauguration comes off, I will leave the public scene, because that is what it means to honorably take full responsibility. "

And so, even though this "Presidential prophecy" is not one of the eight public prophecies that Charlie insists upon, according to several statements he has made he does believe that if it fails to come to pass as foretold, this would be significant enough to merit and declare himself "unreliable" and "leaving the scene". Time will soon tell how things turn out. For his part, Charlie has "laid it on the line", so to speak. We need only wait, watch and pray. Events, or the lack thereof, will reveal the truth concerning Charlie's purported private revelations.

Given all of the recent interest in this particular prophecy as of late, along with the popularity of the original article here on this website concerning Charlie Johnston, I thought I would publish this new article so that those interested can comment on this matter freely and directly here. As always, all comments are published immediately on this website, without moderation. I only ask that commentators be charitable and considerate in their comments.

3,092 comments:

I did not want to add the following information to the article directly, because it simply would have made the article too long, however for those endeavoring to discern Charlie's alleged prophetic mission and message, the following things should be taken into consideration, I personally think:

1) In Jan 2014, Charlie stated on his blog that:"We just finished the last traditional Christmas."

2) In July 2015, in a post entitled "The Summer of our Discontent" Charlie wrote:"After the summer of our discontent will come the Fall, and the fall will be great"

In comments on this website and in private emails it seems that quite a few folks have felt that both of these were failed predictions, since neither of which came to pass with any significance.

It should be noted that unlike the "Presidential prophecy" and the other prophesies mentioned in the article above, these predictions were Charlie's own personal assessments and deductions that he made, presumably from the Visitations that he has supposedly been given. In other words, these predictions did not come directly from his heavenly visitors, but were simply conclusions that he presumably made concerning the information he has purportedly been given through his angel.

Now on the other hand, according to multiple statements from Charlie, the prophesy concerning "Obama not finishing his term/next leader will not come from an election" is a prophesy coming directly from his angel, and it is NOT subject to any interpretations or conclusions on his part.

And so this particular prophesy marks the first prediction (of a half dozen or so total) coming (purportedly) directly from his Angel, and it's fruition bears a specific timeframe, that being it must happen by the Presidential inauguration on January 20th, 2017.

Glenn, I'll have to go back and find it on Charlie's blog, but I remember reading a response he made to one particular commentator who requested Charlie make some obvious distinction when he writes a blog post as to whether he is saying something he interpreted or rather, saying something directly told to him. After initially refusing this request, Charlie got around to saying that readers should be always able to tell when he is quoting directly from his alleged angel, because at the end of it he would use the phrase "I have told you true."

What you left out of this article Glenn, is that Charlie has used that phrase on multiple occasions when discussing the Presidential Prophecy. He has also referred to the fulfillment of the Presidential Prophecy as a "sign" from God, such that we would have faith in his Marian Rescue Prophecy - because "I have told you true."

Thus, the failure of the Presidential Prophecy in less than two weeks' time has a major consequence/implication: it will mean that Charlie "has not told us true." Because we won't have a "sign" from God, the Marian Rescue Prophecy is put into great doubt, along with all of the other five prophecies that are supposed to precede it.

The quote you cite above where Charlie draws comparisons of himself to Joan of Arc are inappropriate for him to mention, especially when he references "errors" that he says Joan made on how a battle would go (he makes no precise citation to back up this assertion). As I mentioned on the other thread, Joan was correct on the first two of her four major prophecies, and was being directly and specifically tested by the Dauphin of France on the first of these - at the battle of Orleans. That Joan died at the hands of the political opposition before her other two major prophecies came to fruition is not a big strike against her. For one thing, they did come true. For another, though she presumed they would take about a year to complete, she made no specific due date or expiration date for the fulfillment of these last two of her prophecies, as Charlie has done vis-a-vis the Presidential Prophecy and the Marian Rescue Prophecy.

Charlie is not in Joan's league yet. He needs to get at least one major prophecy correct where he used the phrase "I have told you true" before any comparison can be made to any authentic mystic or prophet of the past. We'll see about this in a week from Friday.

Here is what Charlie's LinkedIn profile states are his 'top skills:' "Strategic Planning, Social Media, Leadership, Public Speaking, Business Development, Government, Public Relations, Team Building, Coaching, Event Planning."https://www.linkedin.com/in/charlie-johnston-08552b1a

This information is edgy. While not wanting to begrudge a man for work-related skills, one does have to ask a serious question here. With the above-listed, self-described 'top skills,' what is the relationship of these 'top skills' to his claims as a supposed visionary? More to the point, how does one know that Charlie isn't using his 'top skills' to manipulate people into believing his more extraordinary claims?

Charlie doesn't like it at all when people challenge him. That's not a good sign when there's question of potential manipulation.

Someone pointed out in the comments under Patti Armstrong's article on the Register what happens when people challenge or question Charlie. Another person actually left comments defending Charlie's manner of defending himself that he self-described as 'kicking people in the groin' (if they kicked him first). Also, a few months ago, didn't he write something on his web site that indicated he had another vision (supposedly) of Jesus back in May or thereabouts? From this 'vision' Charlie deduced that time was short and he had no time to waste on people who 'misunderstand' him (or words to that effect)? So, blame Jesus for one's lack of patience?

Trump won the election whereas Charlie said we wouldn't even have them (in his opinion). The recall found even more votes for Trump. The Electoral College voted Trump on December 19th. Congress has just certified the election results. I'm not sure of the legality of martial law (which Charlie also said would not happen) or a nuclear bomb going off keeping Obama in office. The moving truck was just at the White House and Obama's building a wall around his new residence! Charlie said that last 'normal' Christmas would take place in 2014 or thereabouts.

Seriously? Something is gravely wrong here. Even still, if Charlie has gotten some things right, a broken clock is still right twice a day. That's not proof, but perhaps evidence of someone with a skill-set.

"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

As we know, the Storm was supposed to break in the summer or fall of 2012, before Obama's first term came to an end.

A term is four years, not eight. There's no record of Charlie being "told" that Obama would be President for eight years.

This leads me to believe that this Presidential prophecy was revised once already, to fit 2016 instead of 2012. Something to chew on...

Another thing to consider is the fact that quite a few people who have followed Charlie have spread Charlie's message about president Obama not finishing his term, and also about the "storm" and societal collapse. Therefore some may feel that their reputations are on the line here with family, coworkers, & friends.

Well, I don't think there will be a peaceful transition of power on the Inauguration Day, as events leading up to it have not been peaceful. Also, when Charlie said "the next stable national leader would not come from the political system, it seems to me that part does include Trump. Trump was not part of the "political system" but ran for President having never held a political office. I also know mystics sometimes misinterpret the messages given them.

L Spinelli - nice job!Again I repeat from Charlie's own words a few days ago : : MY PROPHECIES HAVE NOT BEEN PROVEN FALSE. THEY HAVE ALMOST ALL BEEN PROVEN TRUE - How come Charlie can not answer the question or anyone else on his site - I thought the above were the only prophecies as stated by Charlie himself, now he claims to have prophecies that have been proven correct? I'm confused. The last person to ask the question was expelled from his site and TNRSers calling him names - and Charlie says his spiritual director monitors his comments and allows this! Shouldn't his spiritual director tell Charlie to answer the question and to not allow his flock to insult people which is part of his on-line guidelines.

Joseph J., that's why I think it was a mistake to go public with this message unless he and his spiritual directors were 101 percent sure this was from God. People are spreading these messages unaware that they may be from Satan. Again, was any of this ever run by an exorcist?

Anon @6:11, I distinctly remember Charlie saying that God told him in late 2010 or early 2011 that "the appointed time had come" for the Storm. His pilgrimage started in Feb 2011 and ended when the Storm was originally supposed to break, August 2012. That puts the Presidential prophecy squarely in 2012.

I remember on his own site someone talking about the Rite of Christian Exorcism for some of the dissatisfied Charlielites so I quickly said that was a very good point and one that should apply to Charlie to settle the issue once and for all are these messages authentic? No answer or comment it was if I didn't exist.

Before I reply to your question, I will firstly once again give a disclosure here on this site, so that any new readers may know where I speak from:

Over the past 2 years I have corresponded frequently on a strictly private level with both Charlie and to a lesser extent one of his priest spiritual directors. As I have stated in the comments in the other article on this site, to his credit Charlie has always replied frankly to all of my queries over the past two years. That said, I certainly do not profess to be an expert on "all things Charlie". I will say that I consider myself "neutral" concerning Charlie's purported prophetic mission and message, and I think my articles and numerous comments beneath the articles show that I seek to report the facts truthfully and impartially.

Now, to reply directly to your question, to my knowledge I personally know of no publicly revealed angelic prophecies that have come to pass. Therefore, in the statement from Charlie that you quote, I think Charlie is referring to what he has often called his accuracy concerning his predictions covering the grand "sweep of things". In other words, if you are seeking a documented, verifiable angelic "heavenly" prophesy made public through Charlie that has come to fruition, then I do not believe there are any up to this point, and this is why a response to your question over recent days has gone without reply.

From the oft-referenced National Catholic Register article on Charlie:

David Uebbing, chancellor for the Archdiocese of Denver, told the Register, “The official statement of the archbishop stands on its own, apart from Mr. Johnston’s interpretation, and should be considered in its entirety.” He explained, “The archdiocese does not allow the propagation of messages or visions without certitude that they are from God, which requires a much longer process involving analysis by experts from outside the archdiocese.”

The question about "peaceful transition" is my own thinking....and I think part of Charlie's interpretation, but according to the Presidential Prophecy stated, which is only one sentence long, it says nothing about peaceful transition. What I wonder about is Obama finishing his term. Might that be interpreted in a different way from what "seems" obvious?

Frances, the "prophecy" is vague in that regard. Groups may try to disrupt the Inauguration. It doesn't matter. As of the appointed time on January 20, the Constitution is clear: All hail to the (new) Chief.

Charlie was done as of December 19 when the Electoral College voted him. Congress has now certified the results. Like it or not, Trump is going to be POTUS. The only thing that would stop Trump going into office is an assassination. I would like to believe that Charlie will not be praying for an assassination to prove his claims.

Glenn Dallaire: you wrote, "As I have stated in the comments in the other article on this site, to his credit Charlie has always replied frankly to all of my queries over the past two years."

Your web site is important to many people with interests in things like Charlie Johnston. You are respected. If Charlie is engaging in social networking, having your support would be very important. Can one be surprised if Charlie "has always replied frankly to all of [your] queries?"

I do not mean this to be rude. It is a simple question and nothing more.

The reason I have written the following... "As I have stated in the comments in the other article on this site, to his credit Charlie has always replied frankly to all of my queries over the past two years."

...is because some of the questions that I have asked Charlie privately were quite pointed and likely difficult and/or unpleasant for him to answer, for various reasons.

That said, I remain undecided as to whether Charlie's private revelations are authentic, or not. Personally, I have chosen simply to wait upon events for clarity. I do however think that he is sincere, yet having studied the lives of dozens of mystics I know very well that one can be both sincere, and yet very sincerely mistaken.

"Anonymous said...This article was published on the Vigil of the Epiphany. Symbolic?!?!? Given the subject matter perhaps we are on the eve of our own Epiphany?"-------------------

You know, I had not even considered or thought of this when I published this article on the eve of the Epiphany. For now, God alone knows whether it is significantly symbolic, or not. If the "Presidential prophecy" actually does come to pass, then Charlie's angels purported prediction will certainly be a sort of "epiphany" in its own right, so I suppose in such a case the timing of this article would be quite fitting, I think!

Dear L. Spinelli,As always you provide some very important things to consider. Both you, and Jack and a few others have consistently brought many facts and considerations to the "discernment table". My sincere thanks for this.-Glenn

Glenn, thank you for your reply to Anonymous' post about Charlie and questions. Unfortunately, I do not see where you truly respond to the ramification of the question. All you did was reiterate what was already implicit in the original post.

Charlie has admitted he is into networking or things like that. How do you know that you were or are not being used to this purpose?

Hi Anonymous,Sorry I didn't answer that part of the question--I assure you that it was not intentional.

Now to reply, I chose to write the original article about Charlie prior to any direct contact with him, simply because as the host of a "Mystics of the Church" website, its just what you do--(sounds sort of like one of those Geico commercials, I know!). At that time back in late 2014 it was simply based on his writings on his blog. Since then of course I have come to know Charlie on a personal level. So, could I have been used by Charlie in a sort of networking function? Sure, it's possible I suppose, but only Charlie himself could answer this question. For my part I investigate and write about Charlie's purported prophetic message and mission because "its just what I do" as host of this website.

I will say that because of my own past unpleasant experiences with a couple of alleged mystics, I definitely tend to be quite cautious and reserved towards supposed private revelations. Lets just say that I am prudently skeptical in these matters. This is why, for example, I have only commented on Charlie's site on only a few rare occasions. I much prefer to watch and monitor, and wait upon events (or the lack thereof) to reveal the truth. So what I like to think that I have done in all of this is to have given Charlie a just hearing, while at the same time encouraged others to cautiously consider his message and simply "wait and see" upon the prophecised events.

I've been following Charlie Johnson at a distance for several years now and am no expert. I have a vacillated between belief and not so sure. My criteria is simple and unscientific i.e., does he embody the humility and prayerful disposition of a person that God would choose to deliver his messages. So far, he clears that first low hurtle. Charlie's disposition troubles me frequently as he appears to be cantankerous and short tempered. I can't get a good read on his personal prayer life either. I guess I expect there to be something more substantial in that regard. That troubles me a bit. I'm not sure how I feel about his consecration prayer, dictated or inspired, I'm uncertain. It seems there are many and really is no need to reinvent the wheel imo. But, hey, I'm very far from having any expertise on these matters. Like I said, I'm just an observer, a distant one. I have seen him be very gracious and patient with some of the more challenging and frankly rude commenters on his site. Another good sign…for me. I know I would not have that level of patience. So there's that too. With regard to the Presidential Prophecy, I have a more measured and nuanced view. Anonymous, there are certainly ways other than assassination for Trump to be deprived of the presidency, or crippled in his pursuit of his stated agenda by this outgoing menace. By my read, he's actively undermining the new president. He's laying the groundwork, with the watchdog media, to make every effort and goal unattainable if possible. He's stated flatly and in condescension that he would be around to call Trump on anything he deemed wasn't good for America (like he has a clue, and if he did, would truly act on our behalf). He may have set the ball rolling, or is facilitating the possibility of HRC as Mayor of NY. He's got troops building up on the eastern border of Russia and there are pundits, celebs and "experts" telegraphing a potential nuclear exchange with them. I'm just scratching the surface here. My guess is there are lots of things already put in motion by this administration, which will surprise us all in the weeks and months ahead. You get the picture and probably have much more information than I do about them. So, even if Trump takes office "peacefully', to say that Obama has left the office is fantasy. The country is already balkanized and Obama is directly responsible for it. I don't see how his leaving in some visible way, the office of the president, more than half the country, aligned with global elites will not let this country go and allow Trump to undo the evil that they have taken decades to establish. We're witnessing the end game of a globalist march that has been in the works for many decades. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a de facto spilt with two presidents for a time, one visible and the other hidden for a time. So, Charlie's so called Presidential Prophecy has already come true imo. I'm frustrated that he keeps releasing blog posts that indicate he'll be going silent.

Let us pray fervently for the healing of Charlie Johnston who is obviously extremely unwell and in need of mental health treatment and perhaps an exorcist also. He once said the FBI were keeping tabs on him. Is this still the case? Are the police aware of him? His pronouncements and behaviour are very worrying.

Yes, I agree: your first article was not from him using you. You did, however, give him notable (and free) coverage at a time when he was just building up his social media platform with his supposed revelations. That placed you in a prime position for the potential to be used as part of Charlie's social networking.

I am sure Charlie will deny such was his intention. He may already have done so. Perhaps it wasn't his intention at the time. Nevertheless, what he will not be able to deny is the fact itself. You gave him notable press at a time when he needed it and which benefited his cause. He's already lost Padraig over at the Mother of God forum. If he were to lose you, well, I think you get the point.

It strikes me that the Church has much wisdom in these affairs. Take for instance what happened with Sister Lucia from Fatima. She communicated to the powers that be in the Church the forthcoming World War. They did not publicize it until after the fact. Smart.

It would be good to add here a quote from Charlies recent post named "A decisive conundrum" since it speaks to the subject of this article:

“I do not make many specific pronouncements. I must be accountable for those I make. We are in a Storm and there will be a Rescue. If it please God that I should be rebuked and withdraw, I am good with that. If it should only be for a time, in order that I may be rebuked and purified, I am good with that. It wouldn’t be the first time in the course of my training. If I have failed in such a fundamental way that my work must pass to another, I am humbly good with that. At each step, I have had to do the best I can. Sometimes, it is not good enough. I could not have NOT said what I have said on this, for it was clear and I am obliged to speak candidly on those things I am called to speak at all on. On everything I have ever spoken on, there has always been the possibility of error on a particular, for I am just a little one. But I am also commanded to take full and manly responsibility for everything I say and do. I am not allowed to speak as an uncertain trumpet, nor am I allowed to mealy-mouth error."

Anon @ 2:33, here's where Charlie's "angel" said to him that the government was monitoring him. As a general rule, when "heavenly beings" talk about politics and other such worldly things, you can assume that the vision is coming from somewhere else.

In January of this year (2013), while walking through a Georgia wood after dark, my angel visited me. He had two things to tell me. He was quite amused over the first. He told me I was, indeed, being monitored by government entities, but that I should not be alarmed. I was one of many – and then he broke into a broad grin and told me that while I was a subject of particular interest, they did not take me seriously because I am mostly involved with that superstitious religious stuff.

Anon 1/8, 7:28 pm:

Charlie was done as of December 19 when the Electoral College voted him. Congress has now certified the results. Like it or not, Trump is going to be POTUS. The only thing that would stop Trump going into office is an assassination. I would like to believe that Charlie will not be praying for an assassination to prove his claims.

Charlie was praying for his "crash" that he always talks about to happen before the end of the Year of Mercy. I'm not accusing him of praying for anything to happen to Trump. But the fact that he prayed for something as dire as society collapsing was troubling. He recently said his way of thinking is radically different from most people's. To him, society collapsing is a fulfillment of his prophecy. He says things like this without considering how it will affect most people - it will scare the pants off of them. The disconnect bothers me.

there is an absolute difference between "OBama will not serve out his term" and a "peaceful transition" He is backpedalling to avoid having to "go away". Either Obama does not serve out his term even if for a day or he does. What happens at the inauguration is not relevant to his prophency.

Let us all step back, and pay attention to what is going on right now. Obama has been busy creating HAVOC for the President Elect, and continues daily, to disrupt the transition. The question is will he succeed in finishing in his evil endeavors.The answer I believe is NO. Therefore he will not finish what he has wanted to do since he lost on NOVEMBER 6th.

In my opinion why even draw attention to Charlie on your website. St Padre Pio's made predictions to individuals that came true. He truly was a man of God. Humble in every way. He didn't go on radio and tv shows. I feel Charlie is a quack of a man looking for the attention he otherwise would't get from the public. I think Charlie needs to disappear now before he embarrasses himself and his family. For there are consequences to communicating false prophecy. Remember what happen to Harold Camping who died shortly after claiming he could calucate when "Doomsday," would arrive. What an embarrassment for him and Family radio. His program "Open Forum," was replaced, he suffered a stroke and finally died in 2013. Be careful not to claim God has spoken to you or his angels have visited you. When you speak of what God is about to do you better be right based on your claim that you've been visited. God does not get involved in a dog and pony show. Disappear now while you still have time or suffer the consequences. Your toying with God's plans not what you understand to be God's plan with your feeble mind.

I am a fan of Charlie's. I am a fan of his blog and especially his message of "acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope for others." His presidential prediction is just a very small part of his message. It is a mistake to take that as the entirety of his mission.

I don't know if there will be a peaceful transition of power on January 20th. Under normal circumstances, there would be no reason to doubt there would be. If one administration passes to the next without a hitch, I'm not going to attempt to force a square peg into round hole by looking for an obscure way that Charlie's messages are correct. But, neither is Charlie. He stands without equivocation.

At this point, it would certainly take an unmistakably dramatic event to cause Obama to not serve out his term and the next stable leader to come from outside the political process. Perhaps God wills that it is time for an unmistakably dramatic event. Or maybe not.

Over the past 2 years that I have been reading Charlie's blog, my faith life has transformed from fear and depression at the state of the world into one of humility, love, and hope through surrender to the Lord. Charlie's messages and the "e-fellowship" of everyone on his TNRS blog helped to facilitate that transformation.

The presidential prediction may not come to pass. I personally am not concerned about it. For me and my family, we will recite words of the Surrender Novena, which I was directed to by a member of TNRS blog. "O, Jesus! I surrender myself to you, take care of everything!"

Someone please correct me if I am wrong but this article contradicts its self. In the first yellow highlighted quote from Charlie Johnston it says:

"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

Later in the article it says:

Of course for now the big question at this point is whether or not the purported angelic prophecy concerning Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming from the election process will come to pass as foretold in the remaining two weeks before the scheduled Presidential inauguration on January 20th.

My point here is there is a huge difference between the "political system" and the "election process". That comment was made back in 2008, nearly 9 years ago. Who would have ever thought back then a business man not in the "Political System" would be elected president among the cast of characters who have been entrenched within the political system for decades. As far as I am concerned that portion of the prophesy has already come to pass.

To be honest it seemed to me that Charlie's original 2008 "prophecy" failed since Obama DID finish his term. For that prediction Charlie said nothing about another following election, with another win, or that the term "term" was meant any further than the term he spoke to with the 2008 election. People so wish Charlie to be confirmed in his predictions that often you see excuses or newer interpretations given by his faithful followers. The other non-specific predictions have always seemed to me to just be similar to the many expectations within many just due to the ongoing happenings in the world in general and match so many others, many of which are made as well by our Protestant brethren. Many believers have already looked for some great grace to be given in this 100th anniversary of Fatima's apparitions but also due to the 100th year of the years given to Satan to attempt to take souls away from God via Russian Marxist Communism which was established as a vehicle for such the month after the last Fatima apparition with the Bolshevik Revolution. So a lot is being connected during these times which could make many expect Something anyway!

Is "Take the Next Right Step" any better than "Jesus, I trust in You"? Why turn to an internet prophet when there are the real holy examples of St. Faustina and the children of Fatima?

Johnston spins entertaining stories but there is a lot about him that ought to give any reasonable person doubt. He asks his followers to believe in his extraordinary claims without offering any proof. I look at some of the things he wrote and wonder if he is mentally ill.

Johnston claims he stopped a bank robbery and rescued a family from a burning car:

http://motheofgod.com/threads/charlie-johnston.6342/page-2#post-65484

...I have never served in the military and have thankfully never killed anyone. I have on several occasions dealt with immediate seriously threatening situations and twice, rushed into serious danger to help people. Once, I stopped an attempted bank robbery in progress in central Illinois where a teller and a young woman vice-president were being held (Perhaps I'll tell the narrative sometime, but not now) and once, in Kentucky, rescued a young family from a car whose gas tank burst into flames near a McDonalds and got everyone inside safely covered. I thank God I have not had to kill anyone as some here have had to deal with.

Johnston insists God miraculously saved him before climbing Mt. Meeker, the end point of a pilgrimage that allegedly delayed cataclysmic chastisement.

…While I was camped in my mountain for the Novena at the end of my pilgrimage, I was found by two national park rangers at one point - who detained me for a while (wanting to assure themselves I was not a drug dealer hiding a stash deep in the mountain, I suspect). When they found I drank from the streams, they warned me of the prevalence of a deadly bacteria and asked how I purified my drinking water. I said I prayed and trusted God to purify it for me. With a fearful look, one ranger said it could take a week or two for symptoms to show and asked how long I had been doing it that way. When I replied a little over a year, he looked flummoxed and said, "Well, maybe you have developed an immunity." Smiling, I replied, "If I have, isn't that from God, too?" Grudgingly, he agreed it was.

Johnston often engages in "humblebrag" on his website, telling stories in which he's the hero, as in a recent exchange.

Me – and every one of those jobs (except waitress) I worked at a sit-down restaurant with a buffet at a mall when I was a teen. Maybe the busiest night of my life was when I showed up at work and everyone else called in sick. At first I wondered what to do…then I set my jaw. I put out the buffet, was the short order cook, waited the tables, bussed the tables, ran the register and washed the dishes. Fortunately, it was a fairly slow night…only about 35 customers. I was cheery as ever…and just before closing the customers who were still there gave me a big round of applause. (Most of them worked in the Mall and liked to be able to sit down on their lunch hour – so most knew me as a good kid).

@Jay: Your premise is flawed. You state that you will continue to say a prayer that was given to you by someone who claims to have visions. Yet you will continue, you say, to say this prayer even if Charlie's prophecy of January 20 does not come to pass.

That's spiritual blindness and obstinacy. You have put your faith and trust in a false prophet (at that point) contrary to the truth. That makes you an enemy of the truth, who is Jesus Christ.

Well Anonymous (directly above), I don't really know how much "influence" I may have, but I can tell you that whether this Presidential prophecy comes to pass, or not, I will endeavor to report on it truthfully and impartially. Like I have stated in the past: "We report, you discern".

Thank you Glenn for keeping an eye on the unfolding story of Charlie J.

I have read a lot of his articles, and have to say his advice to Trust in God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to those around you. Well that is sound advice whither anyone likes it or not.

Of course like everyone else I do not know if Charlies' claims are true. To be honest I hope he is wrong. It would be nice if Mr Trump gets to fulfil his term in the White House. Trump reminds me in a way of Mr Reagan.

I have not noticed anyone post of the hope that enough people have started to pray and turn back to God to make it possible for all these doom and gloom scenarios to be avoided. Now that would be another prophets success in getting Gods will respected once again in society. Of course we would not know why things did not work out as predicted, now would we.

But let's just thank God things have not exploded into total chaos to date, in spite of Obama's unbelievable childish behaviour. I hope someone suggests Mr Obama take a leaf out of his wife's book, if he ever wants to act like a statesman. Michelle Obama comes across as a great woman, or have I missed something. Julia

To Anonymous (at 12:13--there have been so many anonymous posts, it's hard to keep them straight) If you are referring to the Surrender Novena, that is not a prayer given to me by Charlie. It is credited to Fr. Dolindo Ruotolo, a contemporary of Padre Pio. Perhaps you should research it as part of your anonymous crusade to define truth.

He has already been wrong. How wrong does he have to be before people heed his bishop? President Obama has served two full terms and will hand over the reigns in a peaceful transition. People so want to believe that God shares their politics that they will chase after all manner of false prophets. Very sad.

Concerning a few of the comments above, it should be pointed out that the "angelic prophecy" is only one sentence and is very simple. No need to twist it like a pretzel.

"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

Note that there is nothing about "peaceful transfer of power", one term ending in 2012, etc..

Simply put, it states that Obama, who is still currently president will not finish his term, and Trump, who was elected and thus has come from the "political system" cannot be the one to take his place. Plain and simple. No need to stretch it into weird interpretations.

Please everyone be calm here. Charlie has already stated that Trump DOES come from the political system (he's been regularly elected), moreover he also stated that Trump can't thus fulfill that prophecy. In conclusion, something really huge must happen for the prophecy to fulfill.If Trump will receive the power on the 20th, the prophecy won't fulfill. Simple as that.The keywords for the next few days are:- Trump- Obama- the 20th

I don't follow this blog and don't think I have ever made a comment on one. I am just one of those poor slobs trying to support my family and do what he thinks is right. I do try to view the Spirit Daily website regularly. I felt I must comment on the situation as described about Charlie Johnson. I begin with the simple truth that you will know them by their fruits. I first heard of Charlie Johnson about a year and a half ago when I heard him give an interview at which Father Pacwa was present. Since then I have received his e-mails and occasionally looked at his website. To me Charlie Johnson seems every bit a sincere and sane person. The story of his journey is inspiring. His support of a much battered Holy Father is admirable. His instincts about politics, radical Islam, the Russians and Chinese are uncanny. He has been talking a long time about issues that are now appearing in the daily headlines and that few seemed to be previously concerned with. I don't know if Donald Trump's election constitutes a national leader not coming from the political system or not, but nevertheless, who would have thunk it? I suppose one reasonable conclusion you might make after the inauguration is that Charlie Johnson is a fraud or a false prophet. I think another might be is that perhaps Charlie just heard it wrong or maybe God changed his mind. For me I will continue to remember to acknowledge God, take the next right step and be a sign of hope. Keep your head up Charlie. Your fruits seem very good to me.

Well, as Charlie has stated, Donald Trump is a validly elected Republican president elect, chosen by the American people. Therefore he has come through the political system through the standard election process.

Now, with that said, sure, he is not your average politician. But that is irrelevant to the prophecy.

I find it interesting that Charlie has said the triumph and rescue of Our Lady will occur in late (he once said October) 2017. On May 13,2010, Pope Benedict in a way said the same thing at Fatima. He said the, "we have but 7 years left to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Fatima, and with it the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and to the Glory of the Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." Then we have the great late mystic Maria Esperanza Servant of God who died in 2004. I was graced with being with her and talking to her and her family in March 2002, and again spending time with her family for a week 2 months after her death. Her husband Geo just died on Jan 3, 2017. He was a beautiful man. Maria said in one of her last interviews, that though Our Lord showed her the Illumination of Conscience he spoke to St Faustina and others about, he never told her the year. However, Maria quickly added that it " is my understanding from Heaven that it will occur no later than 2020 and possibly 2-3 years earlier." Then we have the late Cardinal Cook who died of cancer in early 2015. In a final interview he gave to Catholic writer Robert Moynihan in November 2014, when asked what 5 questions the cardinal would ask Pope Francis, the Cardinal said one of them would be, "Holy father why are you in such a hurry to get certain things done in the church. Could it be that you know Jesus is coming soon into the world." He seemed to want the Holy father to let his fellow bishops know in advance so they could prepare themselves. The cardinal did Not mean the end of the world, but an end as we know it. Like the Illumination. In the spring of 2012 in Spirit daily a web site from Catholic author Michael Brown, the visionary/locution-est originally from Lebanon and now living in the US, one who had been investigated or interviewed by the Vatican, claimed that On February 2012, Our Lord woke her up from a sleep to communicate to her something which included that the illumination he spoke to St Faustina about would happen during 2017. Finally, we St Pio who testified that Garabandal was real and that there would be an illumination followed by a great miracle in Garabandal, Spain. He said Our Lady appeared to him and confirmed this, then showed him the Great Miracle to come. This he told a bishop from Rome and asked the bishop to communicate such to Pope Paul VI and Concheta Gonzalez the primary visionary of Garabandal. Padre made clear these events were at that time (1968) still well off or sometime in the future. So what are we to make of all this? I have been very much involved over the last 9 years establishing what is now 142 hours of adoration at my parish of St Vincent's in California. This has happened despite many challenges and difficulties, only because my primary help has come from Jesus and St.Joseph who I asked for help and as the Patron of this work of Adoration. In these years, it has became very clear to me through adoration that there is little time left, and that Adoration and the illumination and all that follows are closely linked. Jesus wants ALL the faithful to establish a much closer relationship with him and to visit him frequently for help and guidance once things have begun to happen in the world. I now see more and more people coming to Adoration at all hours day and night, and perhaps it is Our Lords final sign to me and others (perhaps the pastor too) that time is short. One adorer claims that the adorer was made aware that the big year is 2017. In either case for my part, I agree with Maria Esperanza, not only about the time table, but more important about the great need for ALL of us to draw closer to Jesus NOW and in the future. May God Bless us all and may we adore Jesus who is among us in the Most Blessed Eucharist. And thank you Glenn for this site. May God Bless you and all whom you love.

Yet another false prophet! SpiritDaily links to several. As an alternative, consider that St. John of the Cross, a true mystic of the Church, counsels us to FLEE and reject any and every "extraordinary" utterance, prophecy, and sign, at least until the Voice of Christ, the Magisterium, makes a decision.

Great post, his website lost me when he said the "Virgin of Guadalupe" didn't like that name or something to that affect! Our Lady of Guadalupe has been called that for along time and I have never read anything contrary to her wanting to be acknowledged differently. Or is that the little understanding I have of her?? I could not accept this premise from him. Whatever it is, I stopped reading his post other then a curiousity of what he had posted once in a while. God bless him that he has given people a stronger faith whether it be from fear of the unknown or wanting a heads up of what is to be.

To think that the Triumph of the Immaculate Hearth of Mary will occur this year, is not logical and plain wrong. Everyone who knows just a little about prophecies from approved Saints and Mystics knows that we have still long years of trials ahead of us. Does it mean no miraculous Rescue in late 2017? Not necessarily, obviously. But the Rescue won't be the Triumph with the consequent era of peace, I'm sorry.Why? Just few examples. Before the Triumph, for those who believe in Medjugorje, each of the ten secrets will have to unfold. Do you think all of the secrets could happen this year? Obviously in no way it could happen. One of the reasons, is that the apparitions are still ongoing.You don't believe in Medjugorje? No problem, it is not needed to believe it. Let's take Garabandal, then. Before the era of peace and Triumph we would have to live the Warning, the Miracle and the conditional Chastisement. The Miracle won't happen this year, as everyone knows. Thus, no Warning and conditional Chastisement also this year. So no Triumph.I could go on and write pages and pages on this matter, and be still right. Glenn, who also studied prophecies, will agree for sure.So, a miraculous event, or Rescue, in late 2017? It could be, but not the Triumph and the era of peace. Proclaiming the contrary, is just false. This doesn't mean that I'm not expecting something big this year. On the contrary.Why did I make this post? To stop once for all the believing that an eventual Rescue later this very same year will coincide with the Triumph of the Immaculate Hearth of Mary, bringing an era of peace. Why am I telling this? Because these are direct words of Our Lady, not mine. We've reached a point where it is necessary to stop the confusion.As always, faithfuls won't have to fear anything, whatever happens.

The Lord often waits until the last minute, therefore, a financial crash of the markets and/or the dollar could happen a day or two before the inauguration which could cause the current administration to declare that the country is too unstable for a new president.........or as Drudge reports this morningthat American warships have fired warning shots to Iranian vessels, that could escalate also to elicit a pause in transition... On a side note, am curious how you think CJ connects, or not, with Mark Mallet's warnings of a similar storm? Either way, I keep my eye on the plow,(while praying), with a few extra provisions that can be donated to a homeless shelter if there's no catastrophe.

I became aware of Charlie Johnston in late 2014, and at that time went back and read every post on his blog from the beginning. My attitude was belief, yet discernment, reading carefully what he had to say and pondering it compared to the news and my own experiences.

My greatest doubt came when I read this from THE BEGINNING OF THE COLLAPSE (March 31, 2014): "Some segments of society are already quietly – or not so quietly – planning for active revolt, accurately assessing that some sectors of government are deliberately trying to provoke a crisis. That is neither prudent nor necessary. God is taking an active role in human events for the duration of the storm. It will not take decades for things to collapse this time. They will collapse this year."

The phrase "They will collapse this year." made me doubt him. After that, many things began to disturb me about his writings, including his general tone, what someone in the comments here referred to as Charlie's "humblebrag." There seems to be a lot of that. Also, his often somewhat thin-skinned reaction to some commenters' doubt, skepticism, or criticism. Finally, his shutting down of discussion and telling readers he would delete all comments opining about the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election (March 2016) finally made me realize he was not what he claimed to be.

Though he claims the "storm" is in full fury, I honestly don't seem much difference between the events of these past few years and the years preceding them, and the events are much milder in my mind than those, say, of the 1960's (anti-war protests, upheaval of our social norms, implementation of Vatican II).

I have believed for a long time the proof of his veracity would be in his prediction about Obama not completing his term and the selection of our next "leader." Although Charlie is often careful to remain vague, it was clear he wanted his readers to assume there would be some kind of unusual happening, implying but not outright saying there would be some sort of event that would remove Obama from office, and whoever took over our country in the ensuing chaos would be selected outside any protocol or law already in place, and may not even be called a "President." Charlie tends to make these broad and vague statements, then deny they imply what he clearly is implying.

Charlie has reached a point where he ventured to actually predict an event, and much like the Locutions to the World author, he will be judged on something he supposedly was told by a messenger of God about events to take place. In his writings he says if he is wrong he will remove himself, as did the author of LTTW, but I sense an equivocation in his resolve to do so, and no attempt whatsoever to renounce all he has said so far.

Even in his conclusion, Charlie does not tell us anything we have not already heard and can rely on. That Our Lady would effect a "rescue" and restoration of our world ("In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph.") was predicted at Fatima.

I don't feel too sorry for Charlie, but I do feel bad for those who believed, depended on, and acted upon his statements. Their credibility among those who know them will now be called into question. The Church is wise to caution believers on private revelation, and insist no one is compelled to accept it, even that approved by the Church. It's a lesson some of us learn the hard way.

Actually as L Spinelli pointed out, Charlie said Obama will not finish his term, his term ended in 2012 ( actually 2013 ) , a term is 4 years, and the next leader will not come from the political process - as we know Obama got re-elected in 2012 so all this fuss now may be for not as that prediction or whatever Charlie calls it was way off the mark in 2012, this is the truth and Charlie should have had zero credibility then that's probably why Charlie tells us don't worry about the prophecies because he's always wrong! That's why we're steered to TNRS because who can argue with that, but prophecies you're either right or wrong and Charlie is wrong.

Wow,We all seem to be very familiar with the same things: Medjugorje, Charlie, Mallett, Garabandal, the Illumination, the Triumph, etc. Sometimes I wonder if I might be blessed enough to be part of the remnant and be able to lead more and more people to Christ and sometimes I wonder if I am being duped by Satan to take me off on these wild goose chases.

All I know is that I will continue to make as many daily Masses as I can, continue to fast as often as I am aable, say my daily rosary and make my one hour adoration visit per week.

I tend to believe that as far as we have fallen morally in the world, we have a lot further to go. And the part that saddens me the most are the lost souls. I like George Michaels music...where is he now? Where is Prince? Where is Debbie Reynolds? Hopefully they all had deathbed conversions but is it likely. It literally makes me want to cry when I think of their potential eternal fate. And these are just the famous people.

Maranatha.

I get frustrated with God (knowing all the time He knows more than me), but why can't He come and stop this madness...the madness of the multitudes of souls maybe being lost the eternal punishment.

Hello..... I believe everyone will do more for Our Lord and Our Lady if we spent more time in prayer verses trying to discern something that seems to be confusing. We will not be judged by what Charlie says is true or not true... it's only tempting you with curiosity. Let's pray for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart and stay focused on what the Church tells us to do! A true prophet leads one to prayer... not fear or prediction of the future. Our Lord and Our Lady are more concerned on what is happening in our hearts towards a holy conversion, leading us to heaven, since we do not know the day or the hour we will be taken from this life! If Christians spread fear, what example of hope do we give to those around us that needs our prayers? Stay close to the sacraments, live the commandments as a confirmation to Jesus of our love for Him, pray and trust what God has in store for you! Be at PEACE!

Charlie has stated that as soon as your name is on the ballot for a political office, you are part of the political system. Hence by his definition, Donald Trump IS part of the political system and does not qualify as the next STABLE national leader. He has said that this leader may come after a few short-term leaders. These would (presumably) come as a result of some chaotic events around the time of the inauguration and beyond.

I first "found" Charlie's prophecies this summer. After reading through everything he offered, my conclusion was that he was not right. Recently though, my priest (new priest) has told of Charlie so without expressing my disbelief in what he has written, I went and reread everything...I still don't feel that he is right. Although I do believe there is a Storm brewing, Charlie to me just feels wrong. Without a doubt, 2017 is going to bring a Storm a Holy Storm... Pray for us Mother Mary... Amen

After all is said and done, there is something to be said about Charlie. Charlie has brought us together to acknowledge God in our every day life, which many of us had become lax; and to look after one another, and our neighbors. This is the extended community that were formed and gathered together from across the U.S., that we otherwise may never have gotten to know, prayed for each other, and had come to the rescue to help another, (something that may not have happened otherwise). Should some major catastrophe happen (I pray not), then we will all be ready and know what we must do. All for the Glory of God!

To Anonymous at 7:19, this is a sample of the talk at the very happy family at Charlie Johnston's website. Vicious. From comments in "Decisive Conundrum."

roses1sb says: Hi Patricia I just would like to say one thing to you please….the word idiots is hurtful and harsh…people are only asking questions because they want some answers, this will only take and push people a way from the site that is doing good…if they are called idiots…it is rather humiliating and I feel you could use better words so not to push people a way…God Bless You

Charlie Johnston says: You certainly have a point, Rose. But in Patricia’s defense, our Lord’s frequent harsh public criticism of people as “vipers” and “hypocrites” was harsh, too. I do not get terribly upset when people who make ugly, intemperate attacks, get rebuked harshly.

roses1sb says:Remove all my post I am no longer following this site…

Charlie Johnston says: Sorry, I have enough work without laboriously going back to remove your posts. I understand and wish you well.

roses1sb says: One more thing Charlie…this is starting to feel like an a cult ….this is not good Charlie….you have allowed this and they follow you like you are the God….please be careful…you get mad sometimes when people ask questions and scold people a little…well it looks to me like you need to talk to your priest about this and see if it is alright for her and others to use such strong language…read her entire post where she start with the word…idiots and then goes on to the bottom…take them to the wood shed…tell the priest all of this and see what he says please.

Charlie Johnston says: Rose, one of my priests reads everything I write each day – and calls me when He has a concern. I think you are getting a bit squeamish about people defending themselves against trolls. Do you really think someone should be allowed to attack, rather than dispassionately comment, without being rebuked? That is a sort of milquetoast Christianity that I have never subscribed to. You are a good woman, but I would have been more impressed if you had been equally condemning of intemperate accusations as you are of defenses against them. I say candidly that I firmly believe the misguided milquetoast Christianity has played a significant role in current disorders. And you never touched on how harshly Jesus spoke to those who restlessly accused and attacked Him. If you just read His words without knowing they were from Him, would you have corrected Him, too? I am not being sarcastic – I am suggesting you genuinely reflect on this, for I think your expectations are based on modern cultural practices, not the Gospels...

Sometimes people say things that make me think they have never even read Scripture. One person made a comment to me that Jesus would always only give a gentle answer to His attackers. I suppose if calling them “vipers” or “hypocrites” or “whited sepulchers, filled with dead things” were considered gentle rejoinders, that would be true. We don’t have to guess what Jesus would have done in most circumstances: Scripture tells us what He actually did. One of the things that most disturbs me is people who seem pious making statements about Jesus that bear no resemblance to the Jesus of the Gospels. It just seems strange.

What was worse was the supposed Bishop Yong Duk calling the people morons and idiots - I have a hard time believing he's a Bishop.If Charlie is intent on correcting people for poor behavior why did he not correct Beckita for 2 clearly false news stories which he even agreed were false but threw the poster off his site for bringing this to light. Charlie is a dictator who thinks he's god, judge and jury, remember his words " this is MY site", "you have no RIGHT to post on MY site". In 11 days Charlie is done.

I shouldn't by now, after watching Charlie for two years, but I'm shocked that Charlie strongly hints that Jesus would call anyone morons or idiots. Jesus' strong language was directed at people who were hypocrites (the Pharisees) or defrauding people (the money changers). Compare that with Charlie, who let a followerr scold someone who simply didn't agree with him. There's no comparison.

It seems to me that his quoted Presidential Prophecy may already be partially fulfilled: Charlie said,

"What I was told in the Spring of 2008 was that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

The "next stable national leader would not come from the political system" means to me that Trump was not a Dem/Rep but was riding in on his own wave. He was not in debt to the Republicans, nor 100% traditionally Republican - meaning he had no connections with them in politics because he was a businessman not a politician. He never held a public office until he won this election. All the traditional Reps lost to him and had no other way to go but to vote for him in the Primary. Trump does "not come from the political system."

The other part of Charlie's Prophecy is still yet to be fulfilled. How it will be fulfilled is not clear to me. When prophets speak, they are not always clear to our human way of thinking. We have only to read Revelations to see this point. Theologians are still uncertain what it all means!

So, this Charlie guy has remonstrated that he is 'almost' always right? Um, WHAT? Look. If a 'prophet' carrying the word of God is not ALWAYS frigging RIGHT, he is NOT a 'prophet'! It is that biblically simple. Secondly, the ONLY way Obama could now NOT 'finish his term' is either be arrested by the House's Sergeant at Arms for treason, etc., or be assassinated...But, this is MOOT, given my FIRST point above....

Neither were Fatima, Lourdes and others after some time had passed. Sr. Lucia was like st. Padre Pio dismissed by some Popes like Pius XI, and John XXIII, while others like John Paul II and Benedict did. St Pio who I trust more than most Bishops and Clergy, made clear that Garabadal would prove itself as Our Lady told him she was appearing at Garabandal and that the warning and Miracle would happen. As the generations have passed, the Catholic church has become very skeptical of almost everything. It has in a way through some in the Clergy and layette become its own worst enemy. I know that the church and the world will have much to suffer and be purified. In 1990, Pope St John Paul said that the first half of the 21st Century we will see much suffering in the world and the church. Both will be purified. But by 2050 there will be peace on earth even if many in the world will parish. Finally, I have noticed as have others that those who are dedicated to Adoration on a regular basis in their life, seem to have a greater sense of what is happening and what is coming. Even to some extent than a number in the clergy, because they are more open to Our Lord.

Where Medgujorje is concerned, with all due respect, you know Nothing. I have been there twice, and it has proven itself in a thousand ways. Those who have not been there and with an open mind and heart to God, their opinion is irrelevant. Why did St Pope John Paul supported Medjugorje like almost no other Catholic Shrine. He scolded Bishops for not going there and seeing with their own eyes and hearts. Our Lady was right when she said at Medjugorje, that by the time the church and the world realized the truth of Medjugorje, it will be too late for the world and the church. As she pointed out in July 1981, "what I began at Fatima, I will finish here in Medjujorje. And from Medjugorje will come the final Triumph of my Immaculate Heart. That is why I and others dismiss any negative remarks about Medjugorje, even the clergy who have not been there. The number one mistake of the Catholic church that the Popes, the Bishops the priests and the faithful have made is the lack of respect for the Most Blessed Sacrament. Receiving Communion in the hands has caused Our Lord great distress. All the people who no longer believe in his true presence because they no longer treat him with reverence. More than 2/3 of American Catholics lost their faith in his true Presence and many many sacrileges have occurred as a result. To end this, supersedes all other issues in the church as the No. 1 that needs to be addressed. Also introducing children to Adoration and what it means who they are with and more as they prepare for first holy communion.

--begin quoted text--His presidential prediction is just a very small part of his message. It is a mistake to take that as the entirety of his mission. --end quoted text--

That assertion is at odds with Charlie's own description of the Presidential Prophecy - he has referred to it as a "sign from God" to all of us so that we would have faith that God and Charlie had "told us true" about the coming Marian Rescue Prophecy. For, he has reasoned, if we received this sign we would then be strengthened in our faith in the "Rescue" so that we could have the fortitude to "take the next right step, etc., etc."

No one has claimed that it is the "entirety of his mission." Raising that as an issue is an example of a logical fallacy - a straw man argument. It is, like it or not, the first very big prophecy that Charlie has claimed "was told" to him by what he claims is an apparition of the angel Gabriel.

When it fails in less than two weeks, no one - or should I put it the way Charlie would: NO ONE - will have reason to believe in any of his other prophecies, neither the "five fundamentals" nor the "Rescue," nor the self aggrandizing one about a shrine being built on Mt. Meeker.

Congratulations on having your faith life restored, I guess. But Charlie's advice on how we should love our neighbors in times of great strife (TNRS, etc.) is not new, so it seems odd that the advice having come from Charlie would make a difference to you. I was taught how to love my neighbors as early as elementary school. Weren't you?

For my part, Charlie is harmless, unless you have been suckered into the vortex of those who are spending copious dollars on building actual "refuges" in which you plan to hunker down. A portion of Charlie's blog posts were simultaneously and contradictorily devoted to recommending such things and then turning around and saying that there's no point in preparing one at all because you will just earn punishment from trying to be too "clever."

The point really is that the failure of the Presidential Prophecy being a fairly big deal is self evident - because Charlie promises to go silent as a result. There's a good reason for that. Even Charlie knows that a failure of the Presidential Prophecy means that the information that was told to him by his claimed, alleged, apparition of the angel Gabriel did not, as it turns out, come from God (because God cannot lie). Ergo, it either came from an evil source (perhaps even Satan - as Charlie has more than hinted at), or it is all a figment of Charlie's overactive imagination (or mental illness, personality disorder, etc.), or it is fraud (he's been making all of this up out of whole cloth for reasons all his own with the intent to deceive).

In any event, Charlie will not have told us true, he will have told us falsely.

Fast forward if you will to the end of 2017 - December 31, 2017 - and pretend for a moment that the world is fairly chaotic, as it is now, maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less, but none of the things prophesied by Charlie have come to fruition. You at that point have every right to continue to feel edified in your faith by Charlie's advice (even without a Marian Rescue), but oughtn't you to have felt that way anyway, already, given all that has been taught by Jesus, the Christ, more than 2,000 years ago, and affirmed and reaffirmed by the Magisterium?

For me, it reminds me of a line from the Bugs Bunny cartoons: "Was this trip really necessary?"

And to all the above commentators still holding on to the idea that the Presidential Prophecy has been fulfilled, or still may be considered valid if Trump is inaugurated, a few points:

1. Charlie insists (as others have already noted) that Trump came from the political system (and by the way, Charlie's use of the phrase "political system" is attributed by him to have come from a conversation in 2008, but his first use of it was in 2016. Prior to that he fairly consistently referred to it as the "election process". But Charlie's switch to "political system" is even broader that "election process". So the prophecy would still fail even if something does prevent Trump from taking office - because Pence, Ryan, and Hatch as the successors in that order would become at least acting President (not a "regent" as Charlie predicts) and they all come from the "political system" (regardless of the notion that some might argue that they didn't come from the "election process"). Remember, Charlie has insisted over and over again that the entirety of our normal systems would be upended, such that the next leader would not come from any process contemplated by those systems and institutions (the Constitution, the Presidential Succession Act, etc.). That is clearly not the case as I write this. Do you really believe that these systems will be inoperable a week from Friday at noon?

2. Charlie knows that the Presidential Prophecy is conjunctive - so both conditions must be satisfied for the prophecy to be considered authentic: A. Obama must leave office prior to next Friday at noon and later repent after leaving the world "in ashes." B. Neither Trump, Pence, Ryan or Hatch can become the president, nor anyone else that the House of Representative may elect. (If my reference here confuses you, just pick up a copy of the Constitution and read it.) Charlie often writes in a way that appears to imply that he will only go silent if both of these conjunctive aspects fail to play out as he prophesied. But Charlie claims to own this thing in its entirety - he's "all in." If either part of this conjunctive prophecy fails, Charlie will know that the prophecy has failed. I have faith that Charlie will be true to his word, that he will show the requisite integrity to follow through on his pledge to go silent. If he doesn't, he is still a false prophet, and that's that. And please spare me the logically fallacious comparisons to Jonah or Joan of Arc - that is just plain sacrilegious.

If all prophecy is conditional, then anyone can say whatever they like and later claim that the prophecy has been averted. But in this instance, and taking what you say at face value, "Catholic", there can be no doubt that we have not changed - at least not for the better - so it cannot be claimed that Obama finished not only his first term, but his second, because people had converted. No doubt though you will be back here in ten days, all trying to explain how you all managed to avert a disaster that was going to happen in the first place. I agree with Jackisback. Charlie may be well-intentioned, but he is plain wrong.

When it comes to Garabandal, when the Blessed Mother appeared to the visionaries at Fatima, she said that she would next appear at San Sebastian (which IS at Garabandal). And it came to pass- she appeared at Garabandal, in Spain. Padre Pio strongly supported the apparitions at Garabandal, and personally knew and supported the visionaries. Padre Pio, before he died, reported that God showed him the great Miracle, ahead of time that would happen in the future, at Garabandal, that Mary spoke about to the Garabandal visionaries. Padre Pio was very holy, and I believe what he said. Also, Pope John Paul,II, also knew and supported the Garabandal visionaries. He spoke highly of them, and the messages that they reported as given by Mary. If these two very holy men supported, Garabandal, and if I have the right to believe in a private revelation, then I don't think you, L Spinelli, should attack my belief in, it, or any others who choose to place credence in it. The Church says that it will approve the apparitions of Garabandal when the great Miracle spoken by Mary,occurs there. And I believe that that Miracle on the hill at Garabandal is going to happen sooner than we think. L Spinelli, if Garabandal proves to be true, and if Mary were to ask you, her son, why you called her messages a side freak show, how would you a answer her? I'm sure before Fatima was approved, people mocked the visionaries, there, until the people waiting in the field, there, (many skeptically), saw the miracle of the spinning sun come falling down through the sky, toward them. Then the thousands of them, believed. Please, L Spinelli, try to show a holy respect for private revelation that still might VERY WELL be shown to be true. And I know you will probably have some comment, or retort, that will somehow attempt to cover or justify your rudeness, and attacking words- but whatever they are, please don't provide them. You have done enough harm by your judgemental and unholy words. Make the Blessed Mother consoled by your silence. This site should not be a place where peoples' beliefs are attacked by others, but a place of Christian unity and support. God bless you, Mr. Spinelli, and all others.

??? Am I in another dimension? I never attacked Garabandal. All I said was Garabandal isn't approved. Every bishop since 1977 has declared it non constat de supernaturalitate, no evidence of supernaturality.

If you're talking about the "carnival sideshow" comment, I was actually referring to Charlie.

That doesn't change my belief that any apparition that doesn't have Church approval is a distraction. There are enough approved ones. Why not pick from them?

Let me post something that fits the facts,and explain Charlie Johnston's behavior. Anyone who has read his posts knows Charlie often writes about himself, tells hard-to-believe stories about his past, claims friendship with unknown but important people who secretly support him, and "doesn't suffer fools gladly" as St. Paul would say (I would call it verbal abuse). He also has written that government agencies keep track of him, although I can't find the citation at the moment.

How to explain this set of behaviors? Cranky Old Testament Prophet? Savvy political operative? The Catholic Church guidelines call for examining the temperament of anyone claiming messages from Heaven. They specifically mention nervous disorders and mental health. Narcissistic Personality Disorder is worth considering as well.

"People with NPD tend to exaggerate their skills and accomplishments as well as their level of intimacy with people they consider to be high-status. Their sense of superiority may cause them to monopolize conversations[11] and to become impatient or disdainful when others talk about themselves.[8] In the course of a conversation, they may purposefully or unknowingly disparage or devalue the other person by overemphasizing their own success. When they are aware that their statements have hurt someone else, they tend to react with contempt and to view it as a sign of weakness.[8] When their own ego is wounded by a real or perceived criticism, their anger can be disproportionate to the situation,[11] but typically, their actions and responses are deliberate and calculated.[8] Despite occasional flare-ups of insecurity, their self-image is primarily stable (i.e., overinflated).[8]

"To the extent that people are pathologically narcissistic, they can be controlling, blaming, self-absorbed, intolerant of others’ views, unaware of others' needs and of the effects of their behavior on others, and insistent that others see them as they wish to be seen.[8] Narcissistic individuals use various strategies to protect the self at the expense of others. They tend to devalue, derogate, insult, blame others and they often respond to threatening feedback with anger and hostility.[12] Since the fragile ego of individuals with NPD is hypersensitive to perceived criticism or defeat, they are prone to feelings of shame, humiliation and worthlessness over minor or even imagined incidents.[11] They usually mask these feelings from others with feigned humility, isolating socially or they may react with outbursts of rage, defiance, or by seeking revenge.[8][9] The merging of the "inflated self-concept" and the "actual self" is seen in the inherent grandiosity of narcissistic personality disorder. Also inherent in this process are the defense mechanisms of denial, idealization and devaluation.[13]

"According to the DSM-5, "Many highly successful individuals display personality traits that might be considered narcissistic. Only when these traits are inflexible, maladaptive, and persisting and cause significant functional impairment or subjective distress do they constitute narcissistic personality disorder."[8] Although overconfidence tends to make individuals with NPD ambitious, it does not necessarily lead to success and high achievement professionally. These individuals may be unwilling to compete or may refuse to take any risks in order to avoid appearing like a failure.[8][9] In addition, their inability to tolerate setbacks, disagreements or criticism, along with lack of empathy, make it difficult for such individuals to work cooperatively with others or to maintain long-term professional relationships with superiors and colleagues.[14]

Dear Glenn and allI would like to leave here a warning to 'navigation'... the audience here seems to be entirely Catholic [nothing against it], so I have a piece of info to give out. Given that I bore some difficulty in writing [a non-maternal language] I prefer to move by points. I'm doing this not to prove my point, but I'll be adding new 'evangelical' source data to the trend. I sense another derailing of some present day prophets (not only Charlie) by God having at the last, very last moment, played a Joker card:1 - Prophets being derailed by a change in God's time-line is an extremely common event; it doesn't mean the prophet is false. The case of Father Steffano Gobbi exemplifies it, because most events stated on his book for around the turn of the century, came to be around 25 years later [a REPRIEVE of one generational time span]. By no means I consider Father Gobbi a False Prophet [Mark Mallet idem], a judgement brought about by people without a proper 'empirical' insight of the prophetic phenomena and of the frequency with which God grants "REPRIEVES" to mankind [and yes, at the cost of 'burning' the prophet… good for humility], changes plans or at least the people supposed to carry them out [because of some 'prayer-warriors', etc.,].2 - Given that this audience is probably 100% catholic, I now feel obliged to cite here what evangelical brothers in the US are now sensing of the last minute Trump Presidency: a HUGE REPRIEVE from God at the very last moment before doom. The consensus is that somehow prayer and the willingness of the remnant Christians to, at last, resort from passivity and actually fight spiritually, brought about a massive turn. The elites have been taken the bone from their teeth at the last byte.Now, even many protestant 'seers' have been derailed by now (countless of them saying as far back as 2008 that Obama was the POTUS, for instance)... BUT ONE prophet rose with an amazing score of mind blowing hits - the exact opposite trend of the 'derailed' prophets [this will prove later that what we are facing is not a surge on false prophecy, but another swing in God's plan]: Mark Taylor3 - … a retired Fire Fighter from Florida, and was given a prophecy back in 2011 about Trump becoming POTUS, he wrote it down, but discarded it after the man did a no show up on the 2011 run. This Prophecy has now gone viral in the religious protestant US background and it is amazingly precise... 100% score. I think that this audience shout become familiar with it; so you can Google 'Mark Taylor' or 'Trump prophecy', but this interview for a radio show is a good resume of both the messenger and message history:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtd35GZDofoCharlie is probably not a false prophet, but like many others has been derailed by a change in God's plan, for an alternative, that was given to an obscure guy years ago and kept in the drawer. Charlie will 'retire' from his mission. Definitively I will refrain to make a judgement on Charlie's honesty and especially to put any label on his back... We are not God. Of course, we should take our conclusions by our own and be wisely prudent… if God changed plans, his job finished and that is it... however, again, it doesn't mean HE IS FALSE. Now, is there a way to ascertain if this was a change in plans?

About Narcissism: a fundamental trait which seems absent in Charlie is compulsive lying, specially about making the individual look good in front of other people. I don't think Charlie can be labeled a 'compulsive lier', can he??

Glenn,Thank you for keeping everyone informed of this important issue.The overall consensus among Catholics in the prophetic blogosphere is that 2017 will see some miraculous events and be a decisive year of choice for humanity as a whole. We must keep in mind that minor variations in some details of various prophecies are to be expected because of fallible human understandings of information from the spiritual world, earthly situations unfold and variables change the outcome of earthly events as each person being makes their individual choice for or against God. Nevertheless, the major events of the prophetic landscape and their affects will remain intact: 10 secrets of Medjugore, Warning, Miracle, Chastisement, and victory of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.Regarding Johnston’s election prophecy, I believe this was an accurate forecast given to Charlie in 2008 that expired with the end of Obama’s first term in 2012. I believe this because a disaster did not occur in the U.S. that would have destroyed the U.S. economy had it occurred shortly after the 2008-2009 financial crisis. The anger and uncertainty from such a collapse likely would have caused the an inexperienced President Obama to resign.• Separate information dated 5/22/12 from the visionary Jennifer (Words from Jesus) appears to substantiate Johnston’s information that some type of disaster would befall the United States during the period of Obama’s first term. Jennifer received information that indicated a financial collapse was to occur before the end of 2012, the two Koreas would go to war, and Russia & China would emerge as new global leaders. Clearly this was a possible future that did not occur. Part II to follow.

Part II Nonetheless, great pressures were in fact building in late 2012 & early 2013 that did result in a change of a major world leader. Pope Benedict XVI resigned on 28 February 2013 and Pope Francis was elected 13 March 2013.From this turn of events, one could conclude that certain pressures did build up but did not become sufficiently manifested in the Americas to cause Obama’s resignation. It seems the pressures were borne by Pope Benedict which caused him to buckle. Nonetheless good came from this change because Christian spirituality initially surged throughout the world with the election of Pope Francis: notwithstanding the current controversies originating from the Vatican.Nevertheless, some questions remain. 1. What was the cause(s) of the great pressures building in 2012 that would have resulted in the fall of America which was shown to the two seers Charlie Johnston and Jennifer? 2. Since disastrous changes to America did not occur years ago, have the disaster(s) been eliminated or just postponed?To me it seems we are not out of the woods yet and the disastrous cause was only postponed. It might have been recently alluded to in a message from Jesus to Christina Gallagher on 13 December 2016. • “There will soon be a great earthquake in the Americas. The Americas are called ‘the new world’ but it is rather ‘the dark world’ which spreads its poison throughout the entire world.” A great earthquake in the New Madrid seismic zone, California San Andreas fault zone, or along the Pacific Northwest fault line could cause catastrophic economic damage to weakened U.S. and global economies.Further, other information provided by both seers can still be considered valid. Just because neither Johnston nor Jennifer were informed by their spiritual contacts that the previous information had been superseded does not mean the overall situation has significantly changed.

Part IIIOther aspects of Johnston’s 5 prophecies seem to be materializing.1. Toppling of governments throughout the world: Europe has many elections in 2017 and populist parties are showing strong support to oust mainstream parties: France & Germany are key elections where standing governments could fall.

2. Fall of political Islam: President Trump wants to team up with Russia to destroy ISIS in Syria.

3. Mass conversion of most Muslims: Likely outcome of the Warning (Illumination of Conscience). It would be analogous to the 1531 miracle of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico.

4. Confrontation between West & China: President Trump has already angered China over several issues and a catastrophic earthquake in the America’s could cause China to undertake risky military ventures given a weakened America, as described here: http://refugeintheheartofgod.com/messages-from-heaven/from-the-mailbag/visions-given-to-steve-in-the-united-kingdom/

5. Alliance between Russia and the U.S. to lead the Judeo-Christian world to endure the confrontation with China. China likely is nervous about Trump’s desire for rapprochement between U.S. and Russia. Moreover, President Trump has made negative comments about Iran and Iran and China on 14 November signed a defense pact. On 13 December 2016, Jesus apparently alluded that this pact would bring catastrophic results.

o Jesus then referred to two countries (which will not be named here) whose leaders have made their pact and signed papers that will bring about the fire to fall from the sky. It will disrupt and disfigure the face of the earth.

Given all of the above it seems that some of the prominent landmarks of 2017 would include the following:1. Some announcements from Fr. Petar Ljubicic foretelling the onset of the initial secrets given to Medjugore visionaries.2. ISIS is destroyed through the combined military action of U.S. & Russian forces in Syria.3. The Warning or Illumination of Conscience causes millions of people of various faiths to convert and enter the Catholic Church.4. The Great Miracle or Second Great Pentecost occurs and is accompanied by permanent signs manifesting at various apparitions sites worldwide.5. Those people or nations who reject the grace of God from the Warning and Miracle become violent against those who accepted God’s grace. This could causes a schism in the church regarding the real presence of Christ during the Holy Sacrifice of the mass. The spiritual schism is manifested physically in the earth by a great earthquake in the Americas and perhaps elsewhere. America or the West in general is perceived as greatly weakened.6. China exploits America’s perceived weakness and seizes terrain it wants to permanently control (South & East China Seas, Taiwan). The seizure of territory triggers U.S. security guarantees that quickly leads to a war involving Western, Russian, and Israeli forces against Iranian & Chinese forces and possibly the militaries of other nations.7. Nuclear capable belligerents employ strategic and or tactical nuclear weapons against each other’s homelands and military forces. This could be the chastisement spoken of at Akita and Garabandal.8. Faithful flee to refuges prepared by God to await the rescue, which is the New Jerusalem, the victory of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

This is not a very heartening view of the year, so we need to be spiritually prepared to cross the threshold of death and enter the spiritual world at any time because no one is guaranteed entry in to the New Jerusalem. We must be mature enough to keep in mind life on earth only guarantees death & judgment. It is up to each person to accept God’s offer of salvation in the spiritual, not physical, world.

So the two initial spiritually relevant events we need to watch for are: 1. Announcements by Fr. Petar Ljubicic2. The Warning or Illumination of Conscience

This is just my two cents on the matters being discussed.Thank you everyone for taking time to consider my views.

Dutchman, Have you ever heard the phrase, "Assuming facts not in evidence?" I can make up stories and cite discredited messengers such as Christina Gallagher too, but to what purpose? There is only one real world, God knows the outcome on the timeline in which we live, he does NOT act like Lucy, pulling the football away from Charlie Brown at the last moment. Remember authentic prophecies come to pass: think Fatima, think Kiebho.

"Glenn, why was my comment from January 7th only just posted within the past 12-15 hours?"-------------------

Hi Anonymous,Sorry about that--it definitely was not intentional. Let me explain. Normally all comments are posted immediately (if you have commented on this site before you probably know), HOWEVER, the comment section here has a built-in "automatic" spam filter, which occasionally puts comments into a "spam" folder, and such was the case with your comment. I usually try and check this spam folder every few days, and when I saw your comment in there I immediately released it.

QUESTION: IF THE WORLD WILL DESCEND INTO CHAOS, THE GREAT STORM HIT US WITH FULL FORCE AS THE US GOVERNMENT COLLAPSES IN A FEW DAYS FROM NOW...

WHY IS KITTY CLEVELAND HOPING TO BE ON "AMERICA'S GOT TALENT" IN FEBRUARY AND WHY ARE CHARLIE JOHNSTON AND HIS FOLLOWERS CHEERING HER ON?

IT'S ALMOST LIKE THEY DON'T REALLY BELIEVE THE PROPHECIES HE'S BEEN PUSHING...

From Johnston's blog, comments on Decisive Conundrum. There's a cheesy video of Kitty singing her song posted at the link, but I can't paste it in here.

Christiaria says: January 8, 2017 at 4:06 pm

Hello, Charlie and friends! I’ve been inspired by Charlie’s “holy audacity” in a new way, i.e. putting it all on the line in obedience to what you believe to be God’s call on your life, even if you invoke the judgment of others and fall flat on your face. I awoke after a dream last week with the conviction that I was supposed to audition for America’s Got Talent by singing “Climb Every Mountain.” Crazy, right?

I’m not in the least bit deluded into thinking that I could win, and I REALLY don’t like the idea of putting a target on my back in the midst of the chaos that is 2017. But the idea would not leave me alone, especially after reading Bishop Barron’s post about a former atheist-turned-RCIA-candidate, who thanked him for leaving the comfort of his church walls to engage the culture. Had the Bishop not done this, the man said he would “still be in his despair.” This brought me to tears as it convicted me to face my fear out of love for God and souls.

If I were to make the live auditions, what an opportunity this could be to be a sign of hope to those in despair! I feel quite foolish and vulnerable, but I ended up submitting the following audition tape to AGT. If they give me a call back, I’ll be auditioning for the producers in Memphis on the First Saturday of February. Bottom line: PLEASE PRAY FOR ME. I’m praying for all of you, too.🙂

Charlie Johnston says: Beautiful Kitty – and I pray for your success. Once we truly understand that God calls us to make the effort, to reach out to Him, but the results are in His hands – and to be grateful for those results, whatever they are, we become a very refined and useful tool in His hands.

Doug says: Got bless you Kitty! May you be a beautiful witness and may it inspire souls back to the faith!

jlynnbyrd says: Kitty, I love that and am praying for you. BTW-you already are a bright shinning ray of hope. ❤

MK- Your points are well made. I didn't mean to imply that Charlie was the sole reason for my faith strengthening. I wrote that his messages and the on-line fellowship from others who visit his site helped facilitate it. Coincidentally, during that time I attended and then put together a CRHP retreat, I read Fr. Gaitley's "33 Days to Morning Glory," and consecrated myself to Jesus through Mary. I also began attending an extra daily mass every week and prayed more daily. I credit the combination of all of it.

My point in commenting originally was to counter some of the trolling and mischaracterizing of Charlie. He is not a fortune teller. His blog is not some sensationalist, click bait site in which he predicts which celebrity romances will end within the next year.

His mission, as he sees it through private revelation, is to hearten the faithful by proclaiming The Rescue.

The Church teaches that you may believe or not believe private revelations. Likewise, I am not attempting to convince anyone. He and his messages are out there for anyone to decide. Everything must be measured for validity and thoughtful, faithful people can disagree.

I respect those who honestly have problems with Charlie's mission. I simply wanted to counter those who hide behind the anonymity of the internet in order to snipe and troll unfairly with shallow characterizations and misleading context.

Events in the world today are not Charlie's call, others have been saying the same thing for years. The only thing that he adds is the fall of political Islam, and there is actually a Muslim convert to Christianity who said about 5 or 6 years ago that Islam would die within 10 years because it has no answers. Charlie was way off base on Trump even calling Trump names and the people that supported him names, using his words they were spewing "poppycock". He had to change his tone in the last month because he realized Trump could win.

To add to Charlie's insults on Trump, according to Attorney Jonathon Emord, Trump has compiled the greatest cabinet in 100 years if not ever in the US, you may not like all of Trump's picks but the cabinet is full of heavy hitters, it is very impressive, take Rex Tillerson as an example, this man can get an audience with any government in the world at a moments notice. And yes Charlie berated Trump and his supporters as little a 1 month before the election. And by berate I mean name calling and belittling.

Charlie has said and done so many things while under the mantle of his angels that negatively impact him I wonder why he is considered a "mystic". There should be some type of holy conversion - I just don't see it. He is a poor representative of my Catholic faith.

“I don't feel too sorry for Charlie, but I do feel bad for those who believed, depended on, and acted upon his statements. Their credibility among those who know them will now be called into question. The Church is wise to caution believers on private revelation, and insist no one is compelled to accept it, even that approved by the Church. It's a lesson some of us learn the hard way.”

@ Anonymous (1-9-17 @ 4:22pmThis response not necessarily directed specifically to you, but you gave me a good lead in that I couldn’t pass up :-) I understand where your sentiments may be coming from, and I sincerely appreciate your concern. And, hey, if this leads you to pray for followers of Charlie, please keep me and my family in mind for we need all we can get!) I am one who believes, depends on, and acts upon The Next Right Step Message, and there’s no sorrow to be found - only joy and gratitude for how my faith has grown! No worries, either, about having my credibility questioned. Frankly, I could care less. Ok, not entirely true – I always struggle when rejected – however, my reasons for sharing Charlie’s blog outweighed my insecurities. I stumbled upon TNRS site in Nov 2015 and yes, after a little while and lots of prayer, I introduced Charlie’s message to my family and friends in a few emails or through chance meetings. I figured 3 things could happen.

Scenario 1: I would immediately be dismissed as a nutcase. Embarrassing? Perhaps. But I didn’t think being perceived as a nut would substantially change my relationship with any of them. Maybe I’d be the butt of a few jokes, but they’d know that I had shared TNRS out of love. I didn’t expect anyone to sever a friendship b/c of this, but if that should prove true, I figured God would help me learn something from that, too. In any case, I stake my credibility, not in prophesy (though useful in reinforcing the message of how to live our lives, too many variables to ever make them our major focus - nor should they be) but rather in sharing who God is. No fear about putting my reputation on the line for encouraging people to trust that God is who He says He is ;-)

Scenario 2: My email/discussions about Charlie might lead to intrigue, discovery, and change. They might decide to read his posts, begin to follow, and take the message to heart (as I was learning to do): Acknowledge God. Take the next right step. Be a sign of hope…. My “recipient list” consisted of faithful Catholics, fallen away ones, Christians of other denominations, Jews, Secularists… Like me, all experiencing various personal struggles or “individual storms” (who isn’t?), some deeply concerned about the direction of our country, while others, at the other end of the spectrum, facing life challenges sans the hope of God. So, when introducing Charlie, I did note that he makes some striking predictions, but framed it in the context of prayerfully seeking God’s will amidst the current messiness of our lives and our world, deepening our relationship with Him, and living in hope - a hope to be shared with others. Isn’t that what evangelization is all about? Even if no Rescue came to pass, I was still be thankful for the opportunity to share Charlie’s message which might lead others to a closer walk with Our Lord.

Scenario 3: My family and friends would tuck Charlie’s prediction about the Rescue in the back of their minds. So, whether scenario 1 or 2 played out (or I was simply ignored) should the full collapse actually happen, they might remember this and know that God does indeed have a plan.

Jill... continued :-)... Well, that sums up my story. I’m certainly not out to discredit or debate anyone. I’m just a nobody struggling to better love my God and those around me (often failing miserably). Guess I felt the need to share my perspective since I sensed a lot of anger and indignation in many comments. Not quite sure what that’s all about. If Charlie’s message isn’t bringing you closer to God, why waste another second on him? I was saddened to read a few false accusations as well as some assertions put forth outside the larger and necessary context. I get it. Most don’t have time to follow TNRS blog in its entirety and perhaps judgments flow freer when fueled by the intense emotions of deeply held convictions (our faith) and real life fears (current world crises). Sprinkle a little pride in the mix (coming from one all too familiar the vice)and it becomes a possible recipe for detraction and perhaps calumny. I imagine that some Spirit Daily readers base their opinions of Charlie and his followers solely on what they read here. Maybe I’m missing something, but wouldn’t it be better to say nothing than to possibly risk engaging in sin? Again, big sinner here so not throwing stones, just trying to make sense of the attacks. Admittedly, I was surprised by them since I had heard great things about this site from rosary prayer group friends. I only decided to check out Spirit Daily when I heard about the article on Charlie so I honestly don’t know if this is characteristic of the entire site. My brief exposure, though, left me feeling that many seem to put a whole lot of emphasis on prophecies themselves rather than what they’re calling us to do. I hope my initial assessment is wrong, but probably won’t find out since subsequent visits here aren’t likely to be part of my “next right step” – sorry, couldn’t resist :-)

With a smidge a humor, a desire for more humility, and a spirit of love, Jill

In his latest blog Charlie said he told a media person 1 day before the election that Trump would win because of voter dissatisfaction - 3 issues with that - 1) why would he care if he stated all along it didn't matter who won - it didn't matter ( something like the Kitty Cleveland auditioning for the next star - why? it doesn't matter at this point as someone pointed out, yet they encourage her in the middle of a storm ? )) he was told over 1 year ago to watch for Trump and he made fun of posters and Trump 3) any person could see Hillary was in trouble and Trump's successful strategy of targeting the swing states was working. If he thinks politics is a "dead man walking, why is he so concerned about politics - stick to religious issues as he told some posters.

However the question being posed here is must a visionary/mystic/prophet have a impeccable moral character? To what degree is sin permitted in their lives? We find much of the answer in the Vatican document entitled "Norms regarding the manner of proceeding in the discernment of presumed apparitions or revelations" where in the section entitled "Criteria for judging, at least with probability, the character of the presumed apparitions or revelations", under the title of "Negative criteria" we find the directive:

d) Gravely immoral acts committed by the subject or his or her followers when the fact [ie. apparition] occurred, or in connection with it.

Given the Church's position in this matter, strictly speaking a visionary/mystic/prophet cannot (or no longer would) remain an authentic mystic during the time that he/she engages in grave, serious sin, because the effects of willful mortal sin inhibits and precludes God's direct revelation in such a person. For example, after David's sins of adultery and murder, we see from the scripture that God no longer spoke to him directly, but spoke to him through the prophet Nathan.

To anonymous @ 3:30 pm, you state: " I was saddened to read a few false accusations as well as some assertions put forth outside the larger and necessary context" - please provide some examples as I myself can certainly provide and support my claims about Charlie, in fact I even saved my comments and published them elsewhere knowing Charlie would scrub my posts as evidence. In regard to the prophecies, it is Charlie himself who made the claim about specific events as revealed by heavenly angels, Jesus, and Our Lady so naturally that's what drew us in to Charlie in the first place. Charlie must be held accountable for those claims. If he wanted to just do a Catholic good news site,that would have been fine, but he made specific prophecies and claims to lure us in, so it is reasonable to want to see these events unfold as the heavenly bodies told Charlie true.Saying nothing is a cope out, if he is false he should be exposed. The other problem is that if you try to get answers from Charlie you get treated like a nobody and you get mocked and demeaned, if Charlie was upfront we wouldn't have to vent here.You definitely have missed a lot about Charlie and that's why you see negative comments on him,if you notice Glenn's other mystics you don't see the negative comments - why, because of Charlie, he's created the angst against him by his pompous attitude - if you think he's upfront, ask him some pointed questions and you'll see what happens to you.

Charlie said the new leader would not come from the political system. I think everyone is interpreting this wrong. In a big way it is true. Mr. Trump is not part of the political establishment and therefore really not part of the "system". As for Obama not finishing his term, let's face it, in this crazy world, things have been pretty shocking every day. In this day and age, 2 weeks is a lifetime and anything can happen.

Truly there have really been quite a few informative and interesting perspectives, providing some really good food for thought and reflection. Obviously there are folks here from all parts of the spectrum in what concerns Charlie, some favorable, some not, which makes it all the more interesting, I personally think.

Reading though all of the comments thusfar, my own thought at this present moment is simply this: If January 20th brings a successful inauguration of President elect Donald Trump, then it is not Charlie who made some kind of error in interpretation or assessment, because as Charlie has stated, this prophecy comes directly from his Angel, and was given very straightforward and direct, with no interpretation required, being that it is literally a one sentence prophecy. So, a failure in the "Presidential prophecy" prediction does not rest upon Charlie as some sort of interpretation failure, but solely upon the authenticity of the message itself, that being a alleged angelic private revelation.

Charlie is not a prophet. Anyone taking the current political temperature could easily conclude that TPTB are quite capable and willing to harm Trump and if anything were to happen to him before the Inauguration, it would not prove Charlie is receiving messages from Heaven, just that he is an astute political commentator. Personally, he strikes me as a classic con man.

Contrast Charlie's vague and general prophecies with a genuine prophecy made by the seers at Fatima which was specific down to the day. Charlie is no seer and he is probably receiving messages from the same "angel" that it present at the demonic apparition of Medjugorje.

I just read Charlie's blog entry of today "Entering the Danger Zone." It begins with some magical thinking in the very first paragraph:

--begin quoted text--Over the last few weeks there has been much speculation over the possibility that I might be objectively wrong about the peaceful transfer of power. That is well and proper, since the key to everything is to take the next right step in each moment, whatever happens. People are preparing themselves for that. But I want to warn you, take care that you not go into panic if a mighty convulsion proves me objectively right. I consider that the most likely eventuality. --end quoted text--

The last sentence is key: "I consider that the most likely eventuality."

Really? Why would that be the case? And does it even make any sense that a "mighty convulsion" that proves Charlie "objectively right" is the most likely eventuality?

First, a basic understanding of the phrase "most likely" is that, at the very least, it means "more likely than not" as in the Merriam Webster dictionary. I say "at the very least" because the same dictionary defines "likely" as "having a high probability of occurring or being true : very probable." The word "most" is defined as "greatest in quantity, extent, or degree: the majority of."

Some people make the case that the adjective "most" in the phrase "most likely" lessens the impact of (or "qualifies") its object "likely." Statisticians tend to look at it this way, - one example I read said if three outcomes had probabilities of 40%, 30% and 30%, the first of these is "most likely" even though it does not have more than a 50% probability of occurring.

But is that what Charlie means when he says this? Dubious. Charlie doesn't say, and I doubt he will address this point. Remember, he "thinks differently" than everyone else...

The phrase is also commonly thought to mean "highly likely", e.g. much more than a 50% chance of occuring, say 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%. Some think it synonymous with "very likely". A crude example is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which published a table of percentages associated with their use of different phrases in the text of their 5th Assessment paper; the percentage they used for "likely" was 66% to 100%, and for "very likely" it was 90% to 100%.

In any case, he cannot mean by use of this phrase "less than 50%." That is because he will either be proven correct or incorrect. He means more than 50%.

How could anyone come to such a conclusion? Our history, as a nation governed by the Constitution (ratified by nine states by late June 1788) includes having had 58 consecutive elections of a President, with all of them having had a peaceful transition of power. There have been occasions where the electoral college votes initially did not produce a victor - and in those cases a solution was voted upon using the Constitution's language at the time, and even in those cases the person came from the political system. There have been occasions where the death of a sitting President led to less-than-immediate transitions of power, but the longest interregnum ended after two whole days.

For Charlie's suggestion of a "mighty convulsion" to prove him "objectively right" to come to pass, then the convulsion must be sufficient to prevent not just Trump from taking the Presidential Oath of Office in a week from Friday, but also, Mike Pence, Paul Ryan, and Orrin Hatch (all of whom come from the "political system").

Then Title 3 US Code Section 19 takes over and shows a list of cabinet officers who would serve as acting President after that, in the following order: Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Secretary of Homeland Security. Because cabinet office holders' terms are not fixed in law, and are not officially replaced until a new appointee is confirmed, if all of the four men I have listed above are unable to serve, then current sitting Secretary of State John Kerry would become acting President, and so on. John Kerry comes from the political system, as does every cabinet member on the list.

For Charlie's "mighty convulsion" to prove true, all of these people must also be unable to serve. At that point we would have a Constitutional Crisis that could be reasonably estimated to last more than a few days.

Is that really "most likely" what will occur in a week and a half?

Ultimately the outcomes are binary. If Trump is unable to take the oath on the 20th, then either a person on the long list I have described becomes the President or acting President - and the Presidential Prophecy fails - or not, and this is the chance that Charlie turns out to be correct, but even then he might not be correct. A crisis at that point could be resolved by members of Congress in some agreed upon way, “likely” similar to Article II, Section 3, and the vote comes in to produce a President or acting President who comes from the political system, and again, the Presidential Prophecy fails. It is possible though, that the Congress fails in this regard, and in some unforeseen way, the military of our country take matters into their own hands (for example, if we found ourselves under attack without a President acting as Commander in Chief), or some civilian somehow assumes leadership and gets the support of the military. But is the probability that these latter, dire, potential results occur better than remote?

The most positive thing one could say about Charlie's "mighty convulsion" scenario to come about such that someone from outside the political system becomes our “next national leader” is that it has a 50% chance to come true. It is a coin-flip type of scenario. It either will happen or it won’t.

It is not the “most likely eventuality.” There is no reason to say such a thing or think such a thing. It is magical reasoning. Is it reasonable to think that all nineteen individuals listed here other than Trump will be somehow unable to serve in the office of President? - simultaneously as of noon next Friday?

Charlie is “all in.” He believes something will happen in the next ten days to prove him “objectively right” vis-à-vis the Presidential Prophecy. He thinks there is a greater than 50% chance that he will be proven right.

As Glenn points out, though, it won’t be Charlie being proven right, it will have been that his source might be genuine, and the source of his information “told us true.”

Keep in mind always that the burden of proof for the information disseminated by any would-be prophet rests with the prophesied information coming to fruition. There is no burden of proof on critics to show that Charlie’s allegedly angelic visitations aren’t real.

WEBSITE MESSAGE: THE COMMENT BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED ON JANUARY 10, 2017 AT 2:00 PM, HOWEVER ONE OF THE PERSONS MENTIONED IN THE MESSAGE ASKED THAT THEIR NAME BE REMOVED. SO, I CHANGED THEIR NAME TO SIMPLY "T" AND RE-POSTED THE COMMENT HERE BELOW:----------"T" at 10:48 AM, you said:

--begin quoted text--I have heard that Obama is preparing a shadow government. Maybe he does not finish his term this way. There are many possibilities, fresh thinking is good.--end quoted text--

No, it's not, especially if that "thinking" is full of delusions of things that are impossible as a matter of law and/or of no consequence or substance even if the scenario you propose actually plays out as you state.

To Ritchie Brubaker, you said:

--begin quoted text--He would not have finished his term if Obama was still president on January 21st--end quoted text--

I have debunked this so many times it is now getting extremely boring to do so. But here is the short version:

Amendment XX, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution (you know, that little document that certain members of our society swear a formal oath to defend and protect from enemies both foreign and domestic) reads as follows:

--begin quoted text--Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of the Senators and Representatvies at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.--end quoted text--

So "T" a "shadow government" is not a government at all, and would have no power or influence over anyone, if the U.S. Constitution is operational. He could not have a "term" that he does not "finish" with respect to something that does not officially exist and where no one would recognize any so-called "shadow government." The tone of your scenario is like that of many of Charlie's followers in "wanting his prophecy to be true," in such a desperate way as to grasp at any fantastical notion to "make it true."

Ritchie, for more information on how someone else not named Barack Obama will be the President, or at the very least, acting President on January 20, 2017 at 12:00:01 p.m. (backed by the full power of the Army and Navy of the United States - over which he will be Commander in Chief) read Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, Amendment XX, Sections 3 and 4 of the Constitution, and finally Title 3 U.S. Code Section 19 - Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act - originally known as the "Presidential Succession Act" of 1947.

I try to be charitable in raising these points, but remember folks, this weblog of Glenn's is devoted to discernment.

The idea that in a week from Friday the U.S. Constitution will somehow be rendered inoperative so as to make scenarios like "T"'s or Ritchie's possible is exhibitive of magical thinking, not discernment. Knowledge is a prerequisite for wisdom. It pays to do more reading, and less shooting from the hip.

Noreen said:"From 2008 to 2012 would have been Obama's full first term, which clearly he fulfilled. So I dare say this puts the issue to rest."

Now, the a purported angelic message states:"...I was told that Barack Obama would win that year's election, that he would not finish his full term, and that the next stable national leader would not come from the political system."

This has been addressed before but I'll reiterate it:"Full term" is not the same as "full first term" like you are stating. While presently this may be Obama's second consecutive term, it is still his "term"; he is still in office so his "full term" is still ongoing, until Jan. 20th.

Glenn I hate to disagree but I googled it and a full term is 4 years, if he gets elected again it's his/her 2nd full term or 8 years as pres. The 22nd amendment limits the president to 2 full terms; http://uspolitics.about.com/od/history/a/Why-Presidents-Can-Serve-Only-Two-Terms.htm and this for kids ( no kidding ) http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/articles/government/22ndamendment.htmIf you google 22nd amendment most if not all the articles state a full term is 4 years. The reason why 4 years is full term is because you can actually serve a partial term and then a full term, therefore they can not be considered as running together because of the 22nd amendment, because by your full term logic Pres Obama can keep running, but it's not the case they are 2 separate distinct full terms or 8 years as president, some sites say the 8 years as his term but it is technical wrong.

Pres Obama is considered as serving two full "consecutive" terms just like Reagan, Clinton and George W Bush. The 22nd Amendment was very clear on the rules for terms. They have to be considered as 2 distinct terms because of the partial term rules.

Well, if I would have known about Charlie four years ago, I surely would have brought this up for discussion and clarification with Charlie and perhaps a few others close to this affair, but it seems that the overall consensus at this point is that since Obama is still our president, then the "full term" statement pertaining to the purported angel's prediction is by presumption still active and ongoing until the 20th. In the past 2 years I personally have heard only a couple people put forth the determination that you are making, so all I can say is that I don't think that this line of thinking is very widely accepted. Either way, ultimately at most there is only 10 more days to go, and then the truth concerning the "Presidential prophecy" will be made clear.

Sometimes the greatest minds miss the most obvious. Bringing this up now or being discovered now adds to the debate. You are right that it may not be widely accepted, but Charlie did say it, so if his prophecies on the 20th come true of which there are 2 parts then that brings the full term debate back into the picture and ultimately will be analyzed when the year is over if he happens to be completely right on everything. Yes at this point we're waiting 10 days because the full term debate needs to be analyzed to what Charlie meant, as usual nothing is clear with Charlie.

The reason why I brought up the "full term" part of the prophecy in the first place is because, to me, it was clearly referring to 2012. The Storm was supposed to break full force in the late summer/early fall of 2012. President Obama wouldn't have finished his (first and could have been only) full term if it broke then.

I don't know how or when this prophecy was tailored to fit 2016, but yes, a full term is four years and not eight.

Well, if the angelic "Presidential prophecy" miraculously does come to pass in both parts, let me tell you all of our heads are going to be swirling in remarkable wonder and awe (and initial confusion!) -For it really would be something to see and experience, that's for sure! Let's face it, on a human, temporal level its not looking that likely or promising--again, that is at least on a human level. In fact, as Jack and others have pointed out, on a human level it was never very likely to happen, given all the Constitutional constraints etc...For both parts to happen it literally would be almost a miracle in and of itself. Truly, it will take almost miraculous events to bring it to reality in both parts of the prophecy.

Yet, even more so would be the purported miraculous, visible "Rescue" through the Immaculate Heart of Mary in late 2017. Now THAT would REALLY be something to see and experience! As much as I have no desire to undergo such a "Storm" that Charlie speaks of, dear God it would really be something to see and experience such a worldwide visible heavenly sign like what Charlie speaks of concerning the purported "Rescue".

But I'll tell you what---if the Presidential prophecy actually does come to pass in both parts, then after we all gather our wits together please do remind me about this "Presidential term" matter, and I promise to put it forth for serious open discussion amongst everyone involved. Fair enough?

Thanks for your comments and may God bless you and your loved ones,Glenn Dallaire

it will now take a mighty big hammer to pound Charlie's square predictions into the round holes of outcome. Time is short. Not just that Jan 20th is practically upon us, but that Islam must convert rather quickly, given its size and historical significance through the centuries. It has less than a year to go.Are you grasping the ramifications here, jammed onto a very shirt time line ?Russia and the US defeat China... THIS year !!!I'm asking again.Are we grasping this?It seems to me that "storm" is not the right word use here.

I want to add to this situation. I was reading the book "open your hearts to MARY queen of peace" by Fathers Tomislav Vlasic and Slavko Barbaric and found a section pertaining to this, I will quote this as it is written as follows "I have to explain several things to you so that you are able to walk truly on the path of spiritual life. Some people come here and, immediately, when they hear that these apparitions will be the last ones of Our Lady on earth and hear about the secrets, they become frightened and start saying that soon there will be a catastrophe, soon there will be a war, soon troubles will come. As to this Our Lady said: It is from this that we are able to see the difference between true and false prophecies. That is, false prophecies are always fatalistic, whilst the Biblical prophecies are always conditional: As you see, it depends on us and, for this reason, Our Lady always stresses the messages of peace, prayer and fasting.

Yes, and this is far from being L. Spinelli's only investigative factual consideration---for if you look back into the comments on the original article here about Charlie, our friend L. Spinelli has brought out several serious considerations onto the discernment table. Not to mention some important information that she has forwarded to me privately on a few occasions. She is indeed a very talented investigator and researcher. And I personally respect and admire those who earnestly seek the facts and the truth (though at times I may disagree with them on conclusions)

And yes, at this point it will take almost a miracle for the first prediction to come true, let alone the other prophecies. Nevertheless, I personally remain neutral, unbiased and impartial as best I can until facts and/or events show otherwise.

Are you all forgetting that prayer, fasting and sacrifice can change things? If they can't, then why pray at all? I believe our 54 day Rosary Novena inspired by Cardinal Burke helped to change the course. Don't stop now! Continue prayer, fasting and the sacrament of confession a d join in Changing the hearts of all people!

Ah, but that's why Charlie has distinguished between "storm" and "crash" - and a so-called "fall" that is either in between those first two or actually just a synonym for the "crash." And by the way, the "fall" was, by every intimation from Charlie, supposed to occur very soon after the summer of 2015. Of course he wasn't very specific about that, and he never used the phrase "I was told" and never put a start date or an expiration date for the "fall" or the "crash." In fact, whenever he has talked openly about either the "fall" or the "crash" he has, without exception, expressed the notion that it was "imminent" and certainly not farther off into the future than six months.

Calling him to account on this is pointless, however. First the defense is raised that it wasn't an actual prophecy, even though Charlie uses the word "prophecy" when defending how he has been "right" in the past, because he didn't use the words "I was told" or the tell tale phrase at the end "I have told you true." Then a second defense is raised, the likes of which says "well, if you really need to have your power shut off and the FBI show up at your door to take you away to a FEMA camp just so that you can believe that the "storm" or "fall" has already occurred (or is in fulls swing), then nothing I say will do you much good." That's the clever use of the logical fallacy known as "shifting the burden of proof" (implying there should be a demand that those who think a "fall" has not occurred yet should be required to disprove that the events Charlie thinks of as exhibitive of the "storm" or "fall" (which he alleges have already occurred) do not constitute the "storm" or "fall" as Charlie claims). But the burden of proof doesn't fall on a critic, it falls on Charlie, as he is the one claiming that the "storm" or "fall" has already occurred or is in "full swing." Charlie does this a lot.

He conflates that logical fallacy with another - "personal incredulity" - expressing astonishment that anyone, ANYONE, would be so naive as to think everything is just as right as rain with the world. There's a tinge of gaslighting to that line of innuendo as well (an attempt to make a critic think he or she is alone in disagreeing with Charlie on this point; it's an attempt to influence a critic to doubt his or her own sanity). Charlie does this a lot too. There's also a conflation of the logical fallacy of "ambiguity" at play here as well, via the use of multiple terms to express the same thing and then later draw distinctions between them when critiqued.

As to the "crash" specifically, and your expression of mounting pressure due to a tightening time frame, that is one event for which Charlie has not claimed as having already occurred (at least not yet). He has casually described the "crash" as a situation where on a Monday things seem as normal as ever, but by Friday when you wake up, you find you cannot access your ATM machine and there is yellow tape blockading the entrance to every gas station. Charlie claims to feel no sense of pressure that the Presidential Prophecy cannot still pan out as he claims his angel told him within the next ten days. Heck, ten days is twice as long as the five day period from a Monday to a Friday.

Many of us see the point you are making, because we know how we would feel if we made as spectacular a prediction as the Presidential Prophecy. We would feel understandably uncomfortable right now (if not previously so - on January 3rd, December 19th, November 8th, etc.). We get it. Charlie does not get it, or at least that is what he claims. He would have us believe that next Friday he will be "whistling by the inaugural stage" even if things don't pan out as he has prophesied.

Your point about the remaining portion of this year is certainly well taken by us, but you must consider the willful suspension of disbelief that Charlie and his followers are capable of vis-a-vis the items you raise. Islam converting? Hey, that might happen in one day when they see the "visible" sign of the Rescue by Mary herself. And besides, what Charlie has predicted is a "vast majority of Muslims" converting (that might only be 51% of them). Russia becoming our ally against political Islam? Heck, Trump has us half way there already in Syria. And Mosul can be retaken in a week if we put significantly more troops on the ground fighting side by side with the Russians.

Oh, and there is no defeat of China. Charlie never "said" that. Don't worry if it becomes difficult to tell if these things have actually happened in full in less than a year, Charlie will tell us!

This assertion has been made multiple times on this blog and the blog that preceded it. While many would agree with you from a spiritual discernment perspective, it is still a non sequitur. I'm not trying to be offensive - rather - I'm communicating what Charlie has said about all his prophecies vis-a-vis the "storm," "fall," "crash" and the "five fundamentals," etc. He has professed that they are NOT conditional. He has expressed on multiple occasions that there is no one can hope to be untouched by the dire things to unfold - "NO ONE" [emphasis Charlie's].

Not a single one of his prophecies has had a conditional aspect to it - "repent or this really bad thing will occur."

So pray, fast, and sacrifice all you want, but Charlie says he "has been told" that these things will all happen regardless.

You see, you can't have a successful blog that speaks of a "Rescue" if you don't first prophesy unconditional near-apocalyptic events.

I dare you to post your sentiment on Charlie's blog. Let us know how that works out for you.

I haven't been here for quite a while. How very sad. People spending precious time debating whether a person is an authentic prophet or not. They are being goaded on by a blog master hoping they will visit the gift store. What rotten fruit Charlie has spewed forth. Turn off your computers and devices, pray, pray, pray some more, go volunteer at a soup kitchen, visit the sick, feed the hungry, comfort the dying. Storm come or no God is with us. Are you with God or busy planning your next post berating a man you think is false rather than praying for his healing?

That's what the devil wants! He wants us to fall into despair and stop praying.

I prayed the first 54 day Novena for the USA. The second is one Novena away from finishing. In fact, that same thought flittered across my mind during this Novena. Why bother? I realized where that thought came from and quashed it immediately.

I noticed that people tried to promote this Rosary at Charlie's, and while he allowed the comments, he never commented. Instead, he pushes his prayer and something called the Surrender Novena. While I would never be one to discourage prayer...surrender clearly means it's going to happen no matter what you do, so use this prayer to get ready. That's fatalistic and quashes hope, in my opinion.

Before the election I told everyone on his site Charlie may have said there will be no election but don't take it for granted there will be no election, pray because this election is very important and don't forget to vote! As it turned out every vote and prayer were needed. Charlie although allowing the comment never said anything. Under pressure from others on what to do he said he was going to take a few stiff drinks and vote for Trump - ha, ha.

As one other person stated above, I too would definitely have to say what causes me to be most skeptical about Charlie Johnston is his almost constant "humble-brag" in which he is often telling stories where he's the hero, full of wisdom and skill, and always comes out smelling like a rose. His numerous political and radio talk show stories are full of this self aggrandizement.

To me such "tooting ones own horn" simply does not correspond to those who posses authentic piety and holiness.

I have been to Charlie's website many times trying to garner some logic in his 'storm' and timelines of his prophecies. Haven't come up with a reason to follow him truthfully. He says so many things that just don't jive with me. The 'Presidential' prophecy is only one that seemed pretty unreasonable, but then again, God's timing and thinking is not ours, so..... He also claims that THIS POPE will be the one to lead us out of the storm.....hmmmm.......at this point the vision of this Papacy is really not headed in that direction but there again....God's 'plan' may be a lot different from where WE see the direction heading. Miracles could indeed happen. Somehow, I just can't see him as authentic, but I guess time will tell all. The next few weeks will at least tell us SOMETHING.

Just to add to L. Spinelli's very appropriate comments, that is a question for Charlie, not us on this blog. But we could speculate on the response you might get if you asked this question in the comment section of his blog. I imagine he might inform you that that is the reason for his particular prayers that he recommends.

Perhaps then, this is akin to a kind of "market segmentation." Charlie is a salesman. The "storm", "fall," and "crash" are the hook and it gets peoples' attention because of its unconditional nature and near-apocalyptic descriptions. Then, if you believe in that hook, he closes the sale - you need to listen to him because of the special information he has been given about the "rescue." And he has this wonderful advice on how to behave during the crisis, which, conveniently for you, does not conflict with the Magisterium.

It reminds me of the pitch I saw while visiting Ireland in 1995: "The only difference between Beamish Stout and any other stout is twenty pence!"

Get it? Charlie's beer is just like the beer that Holy Mother Church serves (and has served for 2,000+ years) but with just a little more extra value to the consumer. Try it. You will be enlightened and edified!

Many of his fans claim that to be true for them (which is harmless). But I have a question for you. If the prophecies of Charlie instead had all the elements except for the "Rescue," and his advice were the same about what to do, (TNRS, etc.), would he have any followers?

--begin quoted text--I haven't been here for quite a while. How very sad. People spending precious time debating whether a person is an authentic prophet or not. They are being goaded on by a blog master hoping they will visit the gift store. What rotten fruit Charlie has spewed forth. Turn off your computers and devices, pray, pray, pray some more, go volunteer at a soup kitchen, visit the sick, feed the hungry, comfort the dying. Storm come or no God is with us. Are you with God or busy planning your next post berating a man you think is false rather than praying for his healing?

Ephesians 5:16 ESV / 122 helpful votes

Making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. --end quoted text--

To add to Joseph's succinct reply, I might also suggest that the stated purpose of Glenn's blog here is discernment, as embedded in the phrase, "we report, you discern." Also, is the irony lost on you? - where here you have taken "precious time" to castigate us as for spending so much "precious time" debating Charlie's authenticity - at 3:24 AM in the middle of the night? - on a computer that you advise us to turn off?

As well, I don't see the need for you to engage in ad hominem against us in describing us as the "rotten fruit" borne of Charlie. Why is that necessary?

Finally, I never plan my next posts, and don't "berate" Charlie just because I think he's false (my opinion is irrelevant; Charlie's illogical constructs are relevant). I am also on the record as saying that when this does not pan out next Friday that Charlie will be in need of our prayers (even though Charlie would "most likely" disagree with that). I simply use Charlie's own words and provide some thoughts on the use of logical fallacies, in an attempt to demonstrate that, when anyone may decide to grant credence to Charlie's assertions, one necessarily must almost always abandon one's own intellect and reason. To me, that is absurd, and worth pointing out. But I'll make a deal with you, when Charlie turns off his computer, I'll turn mine off too.

"Well, if I would have known about Charlie four years ago, I surely would have brought this up for discussion and clarification with Charlie and perhaps a few others close to this affair, but it seems that the overall consensus at this point is that since Obama is still our president, then the "full term" statement pertaining to the purported angel's prediction is by presumption still active and ongoing until the 20th. In the past 2 years I personally have heard only a couple people put forth the determination that you are making, so all I can say is that I don't think that this line of thinking is very widely accepted. Either way, ultimately at most there is only 10 more days to go, and then the truth concerning the "Presidential prophecy" will be made clear."

With respect, Glenn, just because the 4 year term notion is not the consensus does not mean it is thereby wrong. People get things wrong. Charlie's running a good track record lately of it himself!

Hi Anonymous (at 1:14 PM directly above),Yes, I agree that it is certainly possible that the 4 year "full Presidential term" could possibly be a correct perspective concerning this, but my point was (and is) that over recent years neither the Archdiocese, Charlie's spiritual directors, other priests who have followed Charlie, theologians and others who could have weighed in seem not to have made an issue of it--at least not to my knowledge. And so, that is really my only point concerning it, along with the fact that if the next 9 days pass uneventfully along with a successful inauguration of President Trump, then it will really be a moot point no matter what.

According to Charlie's new post "Fake News on Stilts", Charlie says: "Vet everything whether it is congenial to you or not – and you will secure your reputation for credibility and probity. The establishment media used to put ugly slants on stories to deceive the gullible. Now they are the gullible. Let us not count ourselves among their ranks."Ok, let's go back a few weeks when Charlie didn't allow a poster to challenge 2 fake news stories by Beckita on Syria. Luckily the 2 not allowed posts were also posted here for us to see challenging the 2 fake news stories. So Charlie allows 2 fake news stories after he was told they were fake with evidence, backed up by a story from another poster on the same page with another source saying they were fake, so what does Charlie do - ban the poster! If Charlie was really interested in counteracting fake news as he purports he would have agreed they were fake and told everyone they were fake. Instead he calls the evidence "poppycock". One of the fake news stories came via CNN and guess who said today CNN uses fake news - President Elect Trump.I don't know if Charlie is authentic or not, all I can tell you is he tells us the above quote and how to behave vis a via fake news, yet he does the opposite in practice and falls into the same trap he says to avoid. Is this guy for real? You decide.

This afternoons comment exchange on Charlie's blog speaks directly to the subject of this article, so I thought it should definitely be reposted here-Glenn Dallaire----Khruschev says:January 11, 2017 at 1:28 pmRandy 131,

You said: “Has anyone actually been told or shown by GOD, or His Angels, that Donald Trump would definately not be our next President?”

Yes. Charlie has been told this by his angel – that specifically, our next national leader will not come from the political system (U.S. Constitution will not apply) or the election process (i.e., the political system and the election process that just resulted in Donald Trump becoming President-elect).

So we know from Charlie’s visits with the angel Gabriel that the inauguration of Donald Trump is not going to happen next Friday – and that President Obama will leave office before his term is up (however the word “term” is actually defined). That is a done deal. There is nothing optional about this. The system will be upended. Charlie has told us that the angel Gabriel told him that this would be a sign from God for us to have faith in the coming Rescue later this year. It will be a sign that Charlie has been told true and that he, in turn, has told us true. God cannot lie, and his angel Gabriel cannot lie. The swearing in of Donald Trump is not happening. This isn’t a maybe or a percentage thing.

When the mighty convulsion occurs between now and next Friday to prove Charlie right, then you will understand. Charlie is overly humble in saying that this is the most likely eventuality next week. It is 100%. Bank on it.

--------Reply: charliej373 says: (Charlie Johnston)January 11, 2017 at 3:16 pmWell, it is not absolute, for I could be deceived by the satan – and if my angel did not correct me as he has several times before, I would end up objectively wrong.

I just checked out that comment thread, Glenn. There is more, as follows:

--begin quoted text--Khruschev says:January 11, 2017 at 4:29 pmSurely the angel Gabriel would not leave you hanging out to dry at this stage. Why not just ask him about it?

LikeReplycharliej373 says:January 11, 2017 at 5:10 pmIt is not about me, Khruschev. If I have been, I know God has a good reason for it that will become clear enough in time. I understand the instinct, though. St. Peter was very agitated at the idea that Jesus’ triumph could come through His execution. That really is what it means to be “All In.”

Liked by 5 peopleBeckita says:January 11, 2017 at 6:38 pmAmen to ALL IN through thick and thin. -- end quoted text--

I find it curious that he refuses to ask his alleged "angel" about such an important matter as this.

"I find it curious that he refuses to ask his alleged "angel" about such an important matter as this."

Actually Jack, personally I am not at all surprised about this, and I knew beforehand he would answer that question much in that way. The reason being, he has explained in the past that while in his childhood he used to curiously ask his "visitors" questions seeking more information, he eventually learned that the more details he requested, the more he would be held accountable for, and especially have to suffer for. Additionally, the less clarifications and details he asked for, the more trust and faith grew within him, and between him and God (through his purported heavenly visitors). So he eventually stopped asking his angel questions out of curiosity---he would only ask out of absolute necessity, to clarify only that which he did not understand usually concerning only matters that he was called to act upon.

So this, I believe, would describe why Charlie would not ask the Angel for confirmation and details about the "Presidential prophecy", and simply accept and trust in what he was told.

All the above is of course assuming I have accurately grasped his perspective concerning questioning his purported heavenly visitors, which I am quite confident I have, given that he has explained it several times.

I think what can be learned by all this is the lack of discernment of spirits. I think it's a very good lesson given the times we live in. How many prophets have come and gone with a big team of "spiritual directors" in tow? I remember one not too long ago that I checked out due to the said spiritual director being someone with a reputation for being Mother Teresa's spiritual director or some such thing. I read approximately two messages and knew in my spirit it was bunk. Everyone apparently was living by every word this woman spoke and were sorely disappointed by the "failure" of her divinations. This is simply a repeat of the last twenty years....apparently it's always a success with the Catholic crowd because of the starvation going on in the Church so it's reused and recycled again and again. I don't know if people lose their faith over it, but it certainly makes one look silly to others and must give satan great delight. If you are someone who has been misled and deceived by a "prophet" then I would suggest you repent and get busy educating yourself on the gifts of the Holy Spirit and praying that these be increased in you so that WHEN IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT, YOU ARE NOT DECEIVED. You should know the signs to look for, and learn to listen to the Holy Spirit. I'm thinking most people reading these believe that when the Anti-Christ comes on the scene, they'll know and there's no way they'll be deceived. Well, guess again. If everyday men and women claiming to receive prophesies from God were able to mislead and deceive you, the Anti-Christ will be much more of an expert at deception. Take the opportunity to humble yourself. Set about learning about what God has already given you for your safety and salvation then you won't have to rely on men to tell you what God is doing.....you'll have that relationship with Him yourself. Learn to listen, trust, and discern. It's our duty. Frankly, when I read that someone receiving messages from heaven boasts of "hits" and such and that "they" were right I would certainly think twice about placing all my trust in this person. Prophecy isn't about being "right" and "accurate" and "hits"...and having an impressive record of hits..ugh! There shouldn't be effort placed in defending oneself or the message. It all reeks of pride and levity. If someone truly is hearing from God, then the words should speak for themselves and bear the necessary fruit that God intended. It sounds by these posts that many put too much faith in a man. Now, given the chance that you were made to look a little foolish for that, you're going to get your pound of flesh. I wouldn't bother. It really is bordering on sin and obsession. Forgive the man, yourself and go to confession. Move on. As long as you learned something from the experience, all was not lost.

Amen to all you said Anon @ 9:56!! My sister suffered a nervous breakdown because she was convinced the three days of darkness was going to happen last year. She has recovered but is repulsed by all things Catholic and the last time I was brave enough to ask her, she doesn't attend Mass anymore. Charlie is a loser and a liar. Don't look to Glenn to ever write anything definitively negative about him. He will just keep you dangling and visiting this website. I make myself miserable visiting these threads and banging my head against the wall about Charlie's followers. My God help us all and may he condemn all the evil spirits to hell and chain them there forever. Amen.

--begin quoted text--So he eventually stopped asking his angel questions out of curiosity---he would only ask out of absolute necessity, to clarify only that which he did not understand usually concerning only matters that he was called to act upon. --end quoted text--

This answers a question not asked. This is the first time Charlie has directly associated the original communication from his "angel" (in 2008) as possibly having come not from his "angel" but from "the satan" in "person." He has alluded only to the chance at having been fooled by "the satan" for a time - but never specifically came right out and admitted that his "angel's" original communications concerning the sign may have come directly from "the satan." This is new.

Khruschev didn't ask Charlie to dig for details on a prior prophecy. Khruschev asked Charlie to ask his "angel" if he was the one who really did tell Charlie the prophecy. It is a “yes or no” type question to ask his "angel." But I suspect the real reason Charlie will not ask is that there is a very low percentage chance that he will like the answer.

If the answer is, "no, I never you told you that," then Charlie would have to admit that there never was a prophecy about a "sign" all these years (it came from "the satan" impersonating his angel). If the the answer is, "yes, that is precisely what I told you from the beginning," then Charlie is still in a real fix. That is because if the Presidential Prophecy fails next Friday, then Charlie will know that either (1) his "angel" has really been "the satan" all along - and for every conversation he has ever had (not just about the "sign") or (2) there is no angel (and there never was), there is no "the satan," (and there never was) but rather just hallucinations. The only way a “yes” answer from his "angel" will give comfort to Charlie is if the Presidential Prophecy succeeds. One out of four possibilities leaves Charlie's world intact, the other three leaves him shattered.

Basically, Charlie is too chicken to discern the truth about his "angel". Not getting an answer from his "angel" before next Friday (or ever after) allows Charlie, even post-failure of the "sign," to hold on to the illusion that his "angel" really is the angel Gabriel, who only "sometimes" is impersonated by "the satan." He can go on for the rest of the year believing in all the eight "prophecies that he insists upon," and simply hope and pray that all such information didn't really came from "the satan" or mental illness. That way, as the first one of those eight fails to come to pass during the remaining months of 2017, he can cling to the illusion that "the satan" only impersonated his "angel" for that single prophecy and the remaining seven are still in play (and so on, as the next one fails, and the next, and the next).

At the point where the first six have all failed (including the "Rescue") Charlie will be in a serious double-bind of his own creation. If he tries to claim that the five fundamentals and the Rescue are still in the offing in a future year (2018 or beyond) then he condemns himself as the personification of the "special pleading" logical fallacy, as a quintessential goal-post mover, a charlatan in the same league as so many doom-sayers who "change the date" at the last moment. If he comes to the realization that it has all been a big lie from "the satan" or that he must be mentally ill, well... The entirety of his experience may cause constant suffering - at the notion that the "Rescue", his own special variant of the Marian prophecy of the "Triumph of the Immaculate Heart," is not coming, ever.

If this all explodes, as it "most likely" will, what is the duty of Charlie's three spiritual advisors, the Opus Dei priests who allegedly vetted his messages? Charlie has touted having three directors since the beginning of his mystical career. Do they have a duty to stop him or speak out against him? I think they do morally, if not in canon law. Sr. Briege and Fr. Scanlan spoke out against Anne, a Lay Apostle when they lost confidence. Msgr. Esseff didn't, he just quietly withdrew (apparently) and in my opinion that cost people a lot of grief.

Anonymous @ January 11, 2017 at 11:02 PM said:"...Don't look to Glenn to ever write anything definitively negative about him. He will just keep you dangling and visiting this website."----------------------

Hi Anonymous,Well, as I have stated a number of times before, my "job" here is to investigate and report truthfully and without bias; your "job" is to discern as best you can, given the information provided here and elsewhere.

I should add also that the only one who can authoritatively judge Charlie's purported private revelations is the Archbishop of Denver. In lieu of any decisions from the Archbishop, the faithful are free and responsible to discern and decide for themselves.

Having said this, I think that if the presidential inauguration proceeds successfully on Jan. 20th, I would think that the conclusion for those persons who are still yet undecided concerning Charlie will be self evident, meaning most people judge a prophet through his prophesies, according to the Scriptural counsel given in Deuteronomy 18:21-22.---

To reply to Anonymous (directly above from January 12, 2017 at 9:03 AM)Charlie's spiritual directors primarily only concern themselves with Charlie's own personal spiritual direction. It is the sole responsibility of the Archbishop of Denver to decide and make public declarations and decisions concerning Charlie's private revelations.

Thank you for your post. Heaven dies not work under earthly constraints. The Spiritual world is reality not the other way around. Time in Heaven is not understood by us. Trump did not come from the See of politics. Obama did. Read Revelations on anti-Christ. The election was supposed to go the Hillary. Something happened election night, the world prayed in unison. (See YouTube video of Michelle Bachman explaining with timeline of when Christians began praying hard for Trump to win.) you are right, the enemy is waiting like a roaring lion to devour God's people. It wasn't an ordinary election, Trump was not a politician. But if it's more black and white (which in my experience never is) we have only to pray always and wait upon the Lord. His prophesy is not a bad one because Our Lady Triumphs.

Hi Jack,Ultimately, I conclude that only Charlie can answer specifically concerning his reason(s) for not asking the "Angel" for more details or confirmation concerning this prediction--we ourselves are simply left speculating.

I think though that at this point all eyes are on the Presidential inauguration scheduled in 8 days, given the weight of importance of the "Obama not finishing his term/next leader not coming from political process" angelic prophecy.

I say "importance" because judging by all of the comments in recent weeks on this website and on Charlie's concerning this matter, I have come to the conclusion that this "Presidential prophecy" is really a key matter for many folks, and if come January 20th this Angelic prophecy fails, I'm thinking Charlie's trustworthiness as a alleged prophet will be greatly diminished, if not completely invalidated in the eyes of many people. And really, this would be justifiable conclusion based on good, sound reasoning, I think.

This, at least, is the sense that I am getting.Thanks again for all of your comments Jack,-Glenn

Your assertions are composed of multiple classic logical fallacies conflated and compounded upon one another. The first is a "straw man" assertion - "Heaven does not work under earthly constraints" - no one here on this weblog has argued the contrary, but your stating this does not give any credence to Charlie's alleged authenticity.

The second is an "appeal to authority" argument, combined with an "appeal to emotion" and a "loaded question/assertion" - "The Spritual world is reality not the other way around" - you imply a Heavenly authority for this assertion (though that has never been asserted by the Church - in fact it conflicts with free will doctrine - God may be the ultimate reality, but temporal reality of life on this earth that surrounds us each day is shaped by decisions made by us, for good or ill;) the appeal to emotion - wouldn't we all feel great if the "Spiritual world" could be defaulted to so as to make temporal reality different from what we can plainly see (the it would make us feel good doesn't make it true) the loaded assertion - a presumption is built into your statement such that it makes it difficult to argue against without appearing to deny God and his Spiritual will, but that doesn't mean that your statement is true.

The third is "special pleading" - making exceptions when a claim becomes known to be false (e.g., "Time" is not the same thing in heaven,ergo, it is implied that when this "sign" fails next Friday, the clock has not really run out on fulfillment; e.g., "Trump was not a politician," ergo, it is implied that the word "politician" is understood differently in Heaven than by us ignorant humans and hence Trump's election fulfills that part of the prophecy) As others have noted, not even Charlie holds this view because he states, quite correctly, that Trump became a politician the moment he began collecting signatures in the many voting districts to be able to appear on primary ballots. This is conflated and compounded by the use of the "ambiguity" fallacy - as you use or create a double meaning for the word "politician" in order to misrepresent the common understanding of the term (I would suggest you read the foreword to C.S. Lewis' "Mere Christianity" for a great discussion on how the use of this fallacy - the abuse of language and terminology - serves only to obscure rather than to enlighten). No conversation can advance when the plain meaning of terms is obliterated by one party to the conversation.

The final one is a repeat of the Appeal to authority - "His prophecy is not a bad one because Our Lady Triumphs" - and it also conflates Charlie's prophecy with a completely different prophecy from the Book of Revelation and from Fatima. Charlie doesn't get credibility points because his prophecy has a familiar ring-to-the-ear of these other prophecies.

People here on this blog are attempting discernment; your post only muddies the waters for those making an honest attempt.

Your advice: "we have only to pray always and wait upon the Lord," while not a logical fallacy, and commendable in its own right, is a truism. It was true before Charlie came along and always will be true, but does not aid us in discernment of the Presidential Prophecy.

Glenn,I think that Anonymous (1:45pm) asks a valid question. While I'm still relatively new to this, from what I've understood, when others like Locutions to the World" had their prophecies turn out to be false, then you took a stand and found them to be false prophets.

It is my understanding that if there is a peaceful transition on January 20 and Donald Trump is inaugurated (and Obama will have finished his full term), then you will take the stand that Charlie's Presidential Prophecy will turn out to be false. Is this correct?

I think it's foolish to make a judgment on whether Charlie's prophecies are true--at least until a peaceful transition to President Trump takes place. Then, well, he's fair game.

Charlie barely hides that he is a right-wing ideologue. And the people that are on his site pretty much follow his political bent or they get run off. "Crew Dog" in particular posts hard right views that Charlie encourages. Still Charlie says that his politics do not impact whether he has told us "true" with respect to his predictions. But by association his predictions and his political bent are clearly linked.

He would never agree, but if/when his predictions prove to be false, he will be open to the charge that he has been a very clever voice from the alt right, hoodwinking a lot of trusting souls into believing that their political leanings are divinely correct. (Example: Charlie's resolve to do a "Jericho March" on Washington had Michael Savage been banned from the air by the FCC. What??) While he encourages skepticism, he basks in the adulation of his followers who believe in him unquestioningly. One gets the impression that he expects to be the "Regent" who holds the country together after the country falls apart.

"Yong Duk," the alleged bishop, is careful in his posts but his presence gives Charlie credibility. That he is there seems puzzling given that he is not Charlie's bishop who has the responsibility to vet his blog. While his bishop has not condemned Charlie, he has urged caution and prohibited Charlie from speaking in any official capacity in the Denver diocese.

Despite these things, at this point I am merely a skeptic. Things could go either way, but I won't hold my breath.

This is why I have laboriously pointed out the logical fallacies employed by Charlie and so many of his followers - especially his followers.

In the first place, the failure of the Presidential Prophecy is something that Charlie himself has pledged to react to by "going silent" because he will have proven to be "objectively wrong." To me, it couldn't be more clear that Charlie would then believe that the Presidential Prophecy was objectively wrong, the plain meaning of which is "false." Charlie has been adamant though that he would not consider himself a "false prophet" due to his unspecified claim of "being right on the general sweep of things" and also his unsubstantiated claim that almost all of his "other prophecies" have come true.

As Glenn has pointed out, you must discern and decide.

That said, consider the last contributor to this blog whom I critiqued named "Unknown." The reason I went into such detail on the logical fallacies of his (or her) assertions is that it is quite obvious that Charlie's followers will grasp at anything to hold on to the notion that, despite the inauguration happening normally next Friday:

1) the Presidential Prophecy has really been fulfilled regardless (it's just beyond our feeble human understanding of the concepts of "time" and the word "politician" or "term"), or2) The Presidential Prophecy cannot be determined to be true of false yet (for similar reasons as above)

But none of that should matter to you as a discerning individual. As Glenn says, the Presidential Prophecy, as proffered by Charlie, will be false, if things go normally next Friday, and no amount of parsing or redefining of words by "Unknown," or anyone else, will matter one whit.

I've at times stopped going to Charlie's site, however I'm as curious as everyone of what will happen on the 20th and what he says when things don't turn out the way he told us. Apparently Charlie bragged about having 30,000 visits to his site per day.I'm not visiting his site anymore, I don't want to encourage him or his followers, I'll wait until after the inauguration and see the reactions. I'm afraid Charlie will still be around right or wrong.

Anonymous states: "Apparently Charlie bragged about having 30,000 visits to his site per day."

Glenn would know this but these 30,000 visits might not be the 30,000 unique visitors but rather the same smaller set of folks going to his blog multiple times a day looking for the latest tidbit of prophecy. Depending on how the blog visit counter works, it's possible is people toggle between various blog pages, each redirection may constitute a new "visit". Or refreshing the page may count as a new visit. I'm not sure how this works.

Hey...the man was in politics for a long time. He is capable of swaying or even manipulating public opinion. He is obviously astute in telling people what they want to hear. I would be interested in hearing from those closest to him...his family. What would they opinion? This is very suspect to me...I'm sorry but shyster's are in full season now. One of the nicest priest I ever knew...wasn't even a legitimately ordained priest! Buyers beware.

Something that makes me wonder: Charlie always says he will not discuss with anyone other than his spiritual directors how he tests the spirits. I was looking for him to say he had asked the angel the question in 1 Jn 4: "This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus* does not belong to God." Of course discernment is not as easy, C.f. Ignatius' rules for discerning spirits.

Jack Gallagher, excellent posts, especially your 11:32 AM today. I'm new to this blog, but have been following Charlie with a lot of reservations for many months now.

I've wondered why he calls himself a "mystic." He's no Teresa of Avila, Therese of Liseux, Hildegard of Bingen, Catherine of Sienna, or John of the Cross. I've read at least some of all of those saints and he's not one of them. He ought to be classified as a "seer" at this point depending on how January 20 goes.

Glenn, anonymous right above brings up a very good point. After all these years of spiritual direction, chouldn't Charlie have learned a long time ago to "test" his Angel from the onset to verify it was indeed his Angel giving him information? Not sure why I didn't think of it before. Charlie getting "bad info" from the enemy should reaaly have disappeared a long time ago, it sounds. A simple phrase to repeat by the celestial visitor ( ala like Gemma did ) should have been in Charlie's "disxcernment" kit long ago.

Anonymous as 7:09, This isn't intended for deceptive spirits, visions, visitors, demons. This is counsel on how to spot the false teachers that were traveling about and upsetting the communities. They were preaching heresy and confusing the new converts.

“What have you to do with me, Jesus, son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me!” 29 For he had ordered the unclean spirit to come out of the man.This is evidence from Luke that demons, spirits, fallen angels and the like all know exactly who Jesus is and where He comes from......So, it's no "test" to make an alleged angel declare Jesus as come in the flesh and being from God. Hope this helps in your discernment in the future.

"Charlie's spiritual directors primarily only concern themselves with Charlie's own personal spiritual direction. It is the sole responsibility of the Archbishop of Denver to decide and make public declarations and decisions concerning Charlie's private revelations."

If memory serves, Charlie himself has said that his priests only view stuff AFTER he has posted it. If true, shouldn't they be reviewing it PRIOR to his publishing stuff?

You walk a fine line with your point about the Archbishop of Denver. Nevertheless, Charlie's directors do have a say in what takes place before anything is to be published from Charlie.

Of course, if something were to happen to a sitting president before the inauguration of the next one, then the vice president would take over, even for a few days or even hours as president, thus, no election for the 'next' president. Then a few days later or hours or whatever time, the president elect would be inaugurated; thus, a prophecy fulfilled in those circumstances. But who knows... my guess is, none of this is likely. Though anything is possible.

As usual, too clever by half. Charlie would not go for that. He "was told" that Obama would leave office and live, and later repent. The next national leader cannot be Joe Biden, because he comes from the political system. You describe a Constitutional succession of Biden, which Charlie rejects, because Charlie insists that "normal rules" will not apply. Also, the reference to the next national leader cannot be Biden or Trump because it is supposed to be someone outside the political system. So it's not "who knows". We know that your scenario is a fail of the Presidential Prophecy, and so does Charlie.

See my prior posts as to why the prophecy fulfills on the portion regarding the "next national leader" ONLY IF Trump isn't available, AND ONLY IF the nineteen other people in succession under Constitution and the Title 3 US Code Section 19 also all are unable to serve as President.

In response to L. Spinelli, in post above dated January 10-th, 2017, at 7:55am, In your post on the other part of this website, under Charlie Johnston, dated January 6-th, 2017, 9:06am, you absolutely DID say that Garabandal was one of the Carnival side show distractions. You were NOT talking about only Charlie being such. Look at your post. You can deny all you want, but it's there.

Mariko, January 13, 2017, at 12:01am, Garabandal has not been rejected by the Vatican. When the great Miracle spoken about by Mary, at Garabandal takes place there,the Church will okay Garabandal. For, now, it is a private revelation that people can choose to believe if they wish. Both St. Padre Pio, as well as Pope John Paul, knew the Garabandal visionaries, and highly supported the apparitions of Mary that they believed took place there. Mother Mary, on leaving Fatima, told the visionary children that she would be next at San Sebastian, which is AT Garabandal.

I just re-read L Spinelli's post. I can see where you might infer that Garabandal is being grouped along with Charlie's claims. However, the only direct critical assertion made is that "Garabandal is not approved."

I just don't find the level of mean spiritedness that you do.

And in any case, even if Garabandal were approved, the Church doesn't require assent of will or belief in any approved apparition. I say this respectfully, because I know you place great value in these sites. And someday, Garabandal may be approved.

But consider that it is still possible that L Spinelli truly only meant to refer to Charlie as a "sideshow." There are two sentences that separate the reference to Garabandal and the sideshow remark.

Ah yes in his latest blog on Poland's consecration to Christ the King, Charlie allows an Anonymous poster to essentially call Charlie a fraud, it's not a very good post by some high school or college kid. However, he allows it, why? As I've pointed out before he allows these posts to show how people attack him with incoherent thoughts and that's why he allows these type of posts to justify scrubbing other posts.. He would have been best to delete this nonsensical post - it adds nothing. In reality, if you have a good well based argument than contradicts Charlie - guess what, it doesn't see the light of day. But if you then tell Charlie off he usually allows the post to make you look bad and then he tears you apart and you can't rebuff him because he presses the delete button. In 1 week, when this stuff is officially over I will be writing a letter to his Bishop to relate my story on him, no holds barred but my experience and I'm sure others will be doing the same, hopefully this guy can be muzzled, he may be a child of God, but he's not God's chosen one.

Can you not all see the irony? Charlie must be chortling gleefully. You are all as big Charlie followers as those who believe him on his site. But you are rather his anti-followers. Just as taken in, just as passionate, just s misled only in terms of proving him wrong. Why keep posting here endless details and logical arguments trying to show he is a fake? So many are repetitive. Many of you have stated your position but continue to waste the precious gift of time and life by reiterating it. Of course the host wishes you to continue to drive traffic to his site and his gift store. Is this what Jesus would do? If not go and do something far more productive than being a frenzied Charlie Johnston anti-fan fan. You will know soon enough if Charlie has told you true or told you unadulterated bunkum. Do something more God honouring which helps to teach patience.

Dear Jack is back, January 13-th,1:01am, L Spinelli said "sideshows," not the single, "sideshow," and Garabandal was within the context of what he was describing. And I never said, or implied, that anyone has to believe in the apparitions at Garabandal. So I don't see why you are making that point. I still am of the opinion that I stated, and I do not see it the way you do. God bless both you, and Mr. Spinelli.- Helen

"Both St. Padre Pio, as well as Pope John Paul, knew the Garabandal visionaries, and highly supported the apparitions of Mary that they believed took place there. Mother Mary, on leaving Fatima, told the visionary children that she would be next at San Sebastian, which is AT Garabandal."

What Padre Pio and JPII thought of Garabandal is irrelevant. The local Bishop who is the authority had no findings of anything supernatural. Also Padre Pio reportedly told Joey Lomangino that he would get his sight restored at the Garabandal miracle, however Joey has since died. And JPII had Mass with Fr. Stefano Gobbi in his private Chapel. How did Fr. Gobbi's predictions of the triumph in 1998 pan out?

Also, Helen I, can you specify the reference that says the Blessed Mother told the children at Fatima that shw would appear at Garabandal? I never heard that before and would be shocked to learn that was true.

Charlie Johnston seems to be doubling down at his website!! He insists he will be proven right, and he also maintains Obama has the power to stop the transition.

Charlie Johnston says: January 12, 2017 at 12:14 pm

[Regarding critics] Thanks Joe. I stay away form the stuff. If I read it, I fear it might distract me from my purpose and this is a time that calls for calm and steady deliberation. But I very much appreciate the kindness so many here show me in these perilous times. Having gone through similar episodes I know that a month or so from now, some of those involved will be remorseful for the malice this all revealed in them – but others will claim that I either “set them up” or that even though I am right it does not make me actually right.

And again,

Charlie Johnston says: January 12, 2017 at 10:14 am

I think we have a president who would like to provoke a crisis in order that the lightning bolt justifying postponing the transfer of power comes from without rather from within.

As for understanding the Russian mind, what perspective does our foreign-policy establishment understand other than their own hothouse faculty lounge fantasies? You could disagree with a Kissinger, a Baker, an Acheson – while still taking comfort that they were competent and had a solid grasp of global geo-political realities. The problem with the modern foreign-policy establishment is not that it is “neocon,” but that it is both infantile and arrogant in its infantilism.

@Anon above, this is nothing we haven't seen before. He did it with Christmas and the election. He's trying to justify to himself that he hasn't been fooled by Satan for the last 50-some years. Don't twist yourself in knots worrying about next week.

To Anon @ 2:16 am that post you mentioned has been scrubbed, even Charlie realized it actually made Charlie look bad for posting it - it was a way too ridiculous post with no proof or anything just name calling to prove a point - Charlie how about allowing real critics - sorry they've probably been kicked off your site by now for discussing the real issues.Regarding Anon @ 3:02, I would love to ignore Charlie, but who would critic him? You can not debate on his site without enduring scrubbed posts, name calling, being made fun of, all in the name of Christ. Is it appropriate for him to do as he pleases with no checks or balances? No. Yes, we are better off praying and a lot of us are good Catholics but at the same time letting someone like him going unchecked is not good and it does waste our time, but it's something that has to be done otherwise more people will be sucked in by Charlie, a lot of people here are probably BOVOCS ( Burnt Out Victims of Charlie).

We are expecting a large number of BOVOCS after the 20th, so please be gentle on them as they are in recovery and need our help. Hopefully, some will come voluntarily before the 20th as it will not be as bad - but please be understanding as they have been through a traumatic experience and may exhibit unusual behavior associated with TNRS. Wait until we tell everyone that this actually could have been averted in 2012 - ah the truth will come out, help is on the way for the TRNSers through the BOVOC treatment.

I find it frustrating that he keeps doubling down, but what can anyone do about it? Which leads me to this point: Is this "angel" telling him that he'll be proven right in a week? After all, he supposedly gets three visits a week. How is he sure this isn't Satan whispering in his ear?

The fact that he doesn't accept any well-thought out criticism brings me back to a conclusion made long ago. He's obstinate as he always was and is still convinced that he'll be "needed" throughout this year. I don't know what his strange fixation with being needed is all about, but I'm no psychologist and not about to even try to work it out. The whole thing give me a headache.

Signs of the diabolical spirit"…[S]ince the devil may disguise himself as a good spirit and even cause what appears to be authentic mystical phenomena, it is helpful to mention briefly the various signs of the diabolical spirit.

Obstinacy. One of the surest signs of a diabolical spirit.

False humility. This is the disguise for their pride and self-love.

http://www.emmitsburg.net/cult_watch/articles/discerning.htm

5. Interpretation

Is the mystic publicly giving his OWN INTERPRETATION of the privates revelations or visions? There is a great danger in this since even the saints have been known to misinterpret their own visions. While the personal opinion of the mystic does not discredit the private revelation in itself, one should question as to why the mystic seeks public recognition.

7. MYSTIC

Resulting from the spiritual manifestation, has the mystic become more GOD-CENTERED or SELF-CENTERED? Does the mystic claim with absolute certainty that all his private revelations are divinely inspired? If so, this is a danger sign.

In true spiritual manifestations, the mystic is HUMBLE. He does not boast of being favoured by God. He feels unworthy of such a grace, often asking why God would choose him, a sinner, rather than someone else who is more holy. Nor does he set himself apart as being a 'chosen one,' a 'privileged one,' an 'Apostle of the End Times,' a 'true Catholic,' or other glorious titles that belittles the other members of the community of faithful. In the eyes of God, all are equal.

Does the mystic believe beyond any doubt that his spiritual experience or private revelations are VALID and divinely inspired? If the mystic is not open to the possibility of spiritual deception, it is likely that the spiritual manifestation or private revelations are not from Heaven.

8. Private Messages

Are a great portion of the private revelations of a DOOMSDAY nature? Over the centuries, many doomsday prophets have come and gone, and nothing has happened!

11. Publicity

It must be determined if the mystic is SEEKING PUBLICITY. By this, it is meant that the mystic has a great zeal to promote the spiritual manifestation, does public speaking, travels, publishes the story about the spiritual manifestations, etc... Beware of these because this is not the trend of authentic heavenly manifestations.

FIRSTLY A WEBSITE ANNOUNCEMENT: I would like to point out that those interested in reading the most recent comments on this article will need to click on the "Newest" link shown at the bottom of the final comment below, because this website lists comments in 200 per page, so since we are nearing the 200 comment mark, one should click on the "newest" link to be shown the latest comments.

Now, a few thoughts and replies concerning recent comments:

-Concerning the matter of Charlie's three priest spiritual directors, I personally know one of them and we correspond once or twice a month. He has known Charlie for 20 years. Essentially I would say that it is my understanding that there emphasis has always been towards Charlie's private spiritual direction, and not towards the discernment of his alleged private revelations. The one that I know monitors Charlies blog posts, and to a lesser extent his comments beneath his articles. Overall, they take a very light handed approach towards Charlie's public mission and message and his private revelations, leaving Charlie himself completely and fully responsible for his own words and actions.

-As for any "discernment tests", Charlie professes to have his own methodology that he uses, which is essentially independent of his spiritual directors. As for those perhaps done by his spiritual directors over the years, I personally don't have access to that information. I do know of one recent private matter that can be considered a sort of discernment test, but it was essentially inconclusive, or what may be better described as not providing any evidence at all in favor of authenticity. I cannot go into any details on this particular matter, other than to state the above. Besides, ultimately there has been plenty of public matters than can be used for discernment, most especially the purported angelic "Presidential prophecy" currently being discussed here, whose authenticity, or lack of authenticity, will be clearly revealed and determined within one week's time of this writing.

One way or the other this purported angelic "Presidential prophecy" will surely be a very important sign and event which will significantly credit, or discredit Charlie. It is a key matter for discernment for many people because it hinges on such a clear and solid alleged heavenly message, and really does not allow for any wiggle room. It will either be clearly fulfilled, or not.

-As for the Church's official position concerning Garabandal, it is described quite succinctly I think at the top of this article. Neither the local Bishops of Santander (both past and present) nor Rome have ever condemned Garabandal. Neither however has it been approved. So, to factually summarize the Church's position on Garabandal it would be correct to say that the Church has not yet made any definitive pronouncement regarding Garabandal.

Thank you for responding Helen....I have to say, I've read a couple of good biographies of the Children of Fatima....and I never heard that The Blessed Virgin said that the next apparition was to be in Garabandal....or San Sebastian? Did she say that to Sister Lucy? And where could I find that info?....Thank you!

Abortion Stops a Beating Heart

Contact

Obedience to the Church

Statcounter

Total Pageviews

"Why do you talk to me as if I am so far away? I am very near....in your heart.""Ask Me for love. Ask Me; I am burning with desire to give it to you""Talk to Me. For Me there is no sweeter prayer"-Words of our Lord to Gabrielle Bossis.